Are the "Baby Boomers" at odds with social inclusion and equality hypocrites?

After reading Metallicus's recent thread and other threads expressing various outrages at many of similar issues which they might not get or clearly do not fully understand I felt I had to ask something.


I don't want to be ageist but I can't help but wonder if some of the hostility to the Supreme Court's recent decision on marriage equality has to do with the greater changes which have taken place in American society during a lot of these (mostly older) people's lives in which people not from the excluded group join as allies for things like equality?

The tl;dr part is below

For instance, today a lot of straight people love going to things like Pride parades and I know that in my city Pride Weekend and the gay clubs are often filled with straight people looking to party (sometimes annoying the clubs traditional patrons prompting such clubs to post signs outside reminding everyone that the club primarily caters to the LGBTQ community) as the some go these clubs typically have been more interesting, have better music, etc. Likewise, clubs which were not known as places LGBT people were welcome have often gone out of their way to attract them and as such have become more integrated in the process. I think this might be true in other cities too? idk? But there is certainly more of a "nebulosity" two the whole social scene in my city.

So think one difference between older people and younger people in the US with regards to things like the Supreme Court is that LGBT people are less "mysterious" or "scary" or viewed as "other" to younger people because we've all partied together, known people who were openly gay in school or even in our families, etc. And even people in the most rural parts of America might have friends on Facebook, etc who are LGBT.

So this growing acceptance of people who former generations commonly feared or ostracized along with other social and technological changes which have resulted in the world becoming an ever smaller place (and as such things long associated with "American culture" being modified, questioned), has some people who have kind of been out of touch with these gradual changes until one issue or another brings then to the forefront which leads to an often angry rant against them often from what would currently be viewed as an insensitive or perhaps even extreme position.

I've seen this first hand in some recent threads on ATS. I wonder however, if it's all a matter of generational perspective? Most of the people who are uncomfortable with the changes that have taken place tend to be over 50? Yet wasn't their generation, the one which ushered in and promoted vast social changes in the 1960s which continue to present day? Did they think that the river of progress was supposed to stop, ore even, dare I say, reverse course?

From what I understand about the 1960s and 1970s many similar parallels were taking place. There were wars. There were great economic changes as new industries began and old ones ended. People, whose voices were either ignored, silenced to discounted i.e.: people of African, Latino or Native American descent and women were finally being taken seriously and a youth culture based around questioning the beliefs. biases and dogmas of their parents grew up listening to and seeing music, often by performed by people of African descent from the American south.

Was it not they, who were largely responsible for those changes which built popular support for things such as the 1968 Civil Rights Act, the end of segregation, equal pay for women doing the same jobs as men, and other similar social causes which were at the time viewed by many of their parents as "radical"? "Too much too soon." or "Disruptive"?

Those who had dug in their heals on the grounds of "tradition" eventually found themselves on the wrong side of history as things like interracial relationships, women in the workplace and military as well as increased respect for and fairness of people of a different ethnicity were no longer radical things but the norm. It is hard for me to imagine anyone thinking an interracial marriage is an abomination in the eyes God "or that "a women's place is in the home" but I understand that back then there were those who felt those things were a sure sign that the end apocalypse was near and that end would be the end America, or at least the America which they knew.

How ironic then is it that many of the same people who were part of the 1960s youth culture and movements somehow have seemingly missed similar social changes around an increasing awareness of LGBT equality which began in the 1980s around the youngest of their generation were probably becoming middle aged and perhaps less in tune with many of the causes they once championed? Perhaps they understandably became more concerned with taking care of their family, saving for their kid's education, and less with the issues of social justice they once championed?

So when the increasing visibility of lesbian, bi, gay, and trans people in pop culture began the 1990s, I wonder if most were probably unaware, understandably concerned with other things of more personal importance until one by one different states and corporations began recognizing same-sex marriage and offering same-sex married couples the same benefits as heterosexual married couples already were receiving.

Likewise I wonder if most of the former "radical 60s generation" was asleep as movements to treat transsexual and transgender people with the same dignity as those were lucky enough to be born into a body which matched their gender identity, were caught unaware of them until the recent visibility of transsexual and transgender issues with people like Chaz Bono (child of Cher), best selling author Janet Mock, actress Laverne Cox of Orange is the New Black and Laura Jayne Grace of popular punk band "Against Me!" all coming out or coming to prominence as transsexual or transgender people in the last few years?

How else to explain some of the shocked reactions to the news about Caitlyn Jenner who isn't even the first athlete or former athlete to make such a change to live as their genuine self in the public (i.e.: Rene Richards did in the 1970s)?

I mean everyone knows someone who is gay and quite a few people know people who are trans either among their friends, or people they follow on Facebook, Twitter, or perhaps even their own family right?

One thing I've learned from history is that changes in American seem to happen when not just the excluded or discriminated against group who initally pushed for such changes to happen become less "other" and more familiar. It is then that they are joined by those in the majority who are not part of their excluded or discriminated against group.

(continued)

So in summary....


While a growing number of people (a majority among my generation) have become more aware that people are people regardless or where they come from, how they were born, or the sex or of who they love. We know that we all share many of the same feelings, hopes, dreams and fears, likes and dislikes. Even those in the most isolated rural area of the country, who might not personally know someone who is LGBT other than perhaps through social media, youtube, etc.

So could it be that those who typically do not feel that LGBT people (or any other group which has historically been marginalized or faced discrimination for they were) are most typically from the generation who once championed this very idea in the first place but who are less "interconnected"? Could it be that many of the older people who feel that all of the various social changes taking place in America today spell doom be slightly amnesic at best or hypocritical at worst?

I ask this because I usually have asked the age of the original poster in some threads started by people who take up some of the positions which often seem like they feel the country has changed around them without them knowing. I have never received an answer.

So this is just a question from my perspective as a 20 year old "millennial", multi-racial girl born differently (trans) who learned about the "baby boomers" and the events and movements of the 1960s-90s in history/social studies classes or from talking with family members who lived through them.

Is my assessment at all accurate, or is it incomplete or do i have it all wrong?


what do you think?

It appears that those you and others accuse of some sort of 'age based phobias', or of being 'out of touch' etc is just having the ability to see beyond next week, unlike many teenagers that can't see past their next party.

With age comes wisdom and with that comes the ability to see the bigger picture and having the confidence to say if society looks messed up and heading towards oblivion.

Most couldn't give a damn about people being gay or of the ethnicity of individuals, all that has been going on since way before their parents even met (gasps from the shortsighted younger persons- you guys never invented it all), so aren't shocked but concerned about the future of a society where people thinking their 'victim points' as kudos for moral high ground in the 'how dare you have an opinion other than that trolled by MSM' PC swamp, meanwhile in reality, in places like the UK 1400+ white girls were drugged and made sex slaves by 3000+ Pakistani men and the authorities knew about it but refused to act for fear of being called racist. Then there is ISIS and terrorism, there are supporters of it in the UK that can't be deported or locked away due to crazy EU laws that allows them a ''right to a decent standard of life''.

So when people with a conscience and hindsight try to warn tomorrows adults about their future and they are called names for it and verbally attacked for not falling blinkered into the 'liberal' trap, try thinking about the future and if you might prefer being a muslim by force and living in a giant global extension of africa. If you want that then I suggest you move there, if you don't then get a clue.

Or ... Is it that gay is the new "in" thing and fad and that is why so many people like identifying with it the same way everyone had to do that brand new thing in school? In my day, it was Garth Brooks and country pop music that was the fad. People all suddenly started wearing cowboy hats and boots and every boy in my high school wanted a pickup truck.

It makes people feel good to know they are part of the group. They feel included and like they're "one of the guys."

No one likes to be the one who marches to the beat of their own drummer and does their own thing which is what takes actual courage. Anyone can do what everyone else is doing. Not just anyone can stand to be the one who stands alone and does their own thing. The truly brave gays were the ones who were gay before it was cool.

a reply to: JadeStar

Not entirely.

There is some truth to it. But let me tell you I see the lgbt community range from 18 to 70 years of age. Yes I am in the south. And yes I live in Nola so my expiriance may be skewed but maybe not.

Honestly avoid painting absolutes and you may be on to something. Just know it is unlikely the number of the lgbt community has grown so exponentially. So by that logic these older folks just wanted equality but couldn't get it in their youth.

a reply to: JadeStar

The problem is that we're old and not very smart or worldly like the younger generations.

Now those kids are smart!

They are edgy, ironic and get things, like twerking and piercings.

Old people have never spent their lives living and working with a broad spectrum of individuals who may be LGBTQ-BLT.

Old people have only ever hung out with like-minded individuals so we could agree with each other all the time.

We didn't have things like the internet growing up so we're pretty much complete idiots in the ways of the world because we could only rely on "books" (they're like e-books except made from paper).

So you are absolutely correct.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

With age comes wisdom and with that comes the ability to see the bigger picture and having the confidence to say if society looks messed up and heading towards oblivion.

Right....

Ask yourself this question...who exactly are the people that have brought us to the edge of oblivion. The youth, millennials?

No it's the old people with wisdom and the ability to see the bigger picture.

a reply to: olaru12

Seeing the bigger picture is how global agendas are made.

I didn't say ALL older people and was referring to those of wisdom with conscience and MORALITY rather than those of wisdom and nefarious agendas.

But I guess your questioning my comment is more about your dislike of me and my opinions.

a reply to: olaru12

When haven't we been at the edge of oblivion?

Or are we headed for certain doom because of something my generation specifically did?

Interesting question. I'm not sure age has everything to do with it. I'm over 50, and I know of several regular posters here off the top of my head who are also over 50 who are much more open-minded and accepting than some of the younger posters here.

I think some of it depends on who your biggest influence was growing up. Mine was my mom, who was always very liberal. I remember her planning my 8th birthday party - she hand-drew personalized party invitations for every girl in my class. She drew princesses on the front of the invitations with each one having the same hair and eye color of the girl who was getting the invite. I had one black girl in my class, and she drew a dark-skinned princess just for her. She tried very hard to include this girl in the games we played during the party. I remember her telling me when I was older that some of the white girls' parents complained of their girls attending a party with a black girl. She wasn't exactly popular among the parents of my friends and classmates. Can you believe that? It was 1968, in the South (Texas).

Now I know that not having that influence growing up doesn't necessarily mean you won't be more tolerant, as my mom grew up in a racist family with racist friends. She didn't know any other way. She didn't really think about racism as a thing until she started hearing about Martin Luther King Jr. when she was a young adult. She told me once that reading a speech he wrote absolutely transformed her - changed her life. She is in her mid-70's now, and remains a very liberal, open-minded and accepting person of everyone, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.

a reply to: beezzer

In as not offensive way as possible what does blt mean?

originally posted by: Sillyosaurus
a reply to: beezzer

In as not offensive way as possible what does blt mean?

Bacon
lettuce
Tomato


I was hungry when I wrote that.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Well at least you could afford to have princess parties for all the girls in your class. Wonder why you excluded the boys though?

I was the only girl who went to several of the boys' birthday parties.

a reply to: JadeStar It's not age. I am generation X. So I would be in the middle here. The outrage is thinly veiled bigotry and 'victim blaming' for some made up erosion of society. The older people should actually know better. I am actually quite proud of millenials, my daughter being one. I am happy to have passed to her tolerance and caring that my mother passed to me.

a reply to: JadeStar

Jade. I can pretty much assure you that a strong percentage of those 'boomers' who took the social and cultural changes seriously back in the 60s are over joyed with this decision. Unfortunately those boomers were only a minority of that generation.

a reply to: JadeStar

Just because people have a certain personality types that may be more femenine or more masculine does not necessitate that these individules be forced into sterio typical roles of Gay, Lesbian or transgender.

BTW, I am boomer/GenX not fully boomer and not fully GenX

a reply to: JadeStar

Well I hope when and if this country comes apart you have found out who's fault all this is ... because it will be the only satisfying mental thought you will have while attempting to survive.

Oh and when you see the OLD guys gathering up there kids and grand kids to attempt to survive the hell our illustrious governments have bestowed on us, don't even think of asking him for help...you would not want be a BIGOT ... now would you?

At the risk of irritating several members in this thread, I must agree with a few others. The first three repliers to the OP in particular I agree with.

I hope this doesn't seem like I'm going off topic here, it's not my intent, but I'm trying to draw a line between certain occurrences and other happenings. Consider the world around us now. I'm not saying it's any more precarious now than it ever was, but lets momentarily take a good examination of the meaning of things today.

How many people have degrees? How much easier is it for people to get a degree today than it was? Our degrees are getting weaker, especially in America (I can't speak for many other countries, and I won't, but it seems that the US is declining in education in particular, and I'd be surprised if we were the only ones). You've got a society and generation of people, who have had their education watered down so that it is palatable and everyone can say "they won." When in reality, not everyone can - and those who actually could are the ones that have to suffer because the norm has to be made to feel good. There's a lack of fundamental basics that aren't being taught - we talk about health like it's a religion but actually don't get irritated by the fast food commercials playing on TV or the radio every five minutes...really.

It's not just a democrat/republican or liberal/conservative thing either. For some reason, we as a society insist that everyone has to be made to feel equal. That means you can literally - and pardon my crassness - suck at a sport, or a subject in school, but you get to advance or have a trophy anyway, because we don't want you to feel left out. That's how bad we really are trying to appease people. Eventually, that's going to come back to get us.

So, when I say that the world is going to hell - it's not because I think that "oh no, something progressive has happened." It's because the tolerance level is literally getting to a point where it is ridiculous. I don't honestly have a problem with LGBT "marriage" (although, I wish a different term would be used), but I can understand where people might be pulling their hair out over it - and they have every right to do so.

a reply to: beezzer

Plus back in our day going viral was something to be avoided .Now a group is able to take a short clip of something or someone and through social media go around the world where every one is dancing Gangnam Style and on Leterman .The same things were going on way back but the volume is much louder .

a reply to: JadeStar

Thank you for posting this. You explain your thoughts clearly and eloquently.

I am 51 years old, so I'm at the tail end of the baby boomer generation. I am very liberal. I have many gay and lesbian friends. I have an easier time relating and understanding people your age than most people my age. I've been told I think younger. I don't think that's a bad thing.

I love diversity, and thinks it makes our society better. It's sad to see so much prejudice and hate. So I guess I'm different from most people my age. We're not all tunnel vision resistant to change people. I think you'd be surprised how many my age are more like those your age.