Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gays are not immune to various economic forces that shape particular areas.
LGBT but in particular gay men have been fleeing California for Washington state and even British Columbia for years now. That and or even places like Dallas, Houston and more "sane" parts of Texas. Reasons are quite simple; economics.
People of all races, creeds, colors, and sexual preferences are fleeing high cost of living states (much of the North East and West Coast) for places with cheaper living and better employment opportunities.
You can thank Obama and his administration for pushing the end of DOMA and extending anti-discriminatory protections. Even in so called "hostile" to gay rights states like Alabama have been forced to accept things like gay marriage and same sex adoption of children.
I'm gay and the grossest thing I can think of is "marriage" and "adoption of children". How did my kind turn so straight? ugh. it's embarrassing.
Not that I'm against gay marriage, but the gay activists who campaigned for gay marriage were well to do professional people who wanted to live like their straight counterparts and who wanted access to the same benefits.
The fact that gay marriage was passed in NYC clearly didn't protect gay bars, or really do anything for poor working gays who can barely afford to rent a room.
For some people a stable relationship can make one's economic situation better. There are legit reasons why people get married, and there are legit reasons why people have kids. And when gay people have kids, they don't always adopt gay men still have sperm like other men so biological kids do happen to if someone wants them to happen.
People in this thread keep focusing on the fact that they are leaving because it has become economically infeasible to live in these liberal cities/states. But you're ignoring the fact of why that is the case. Part of it has to do with the types of politicians they have been electing and the policies they promote. And these gay people have almost certainly been voting for those same politicians. And now they are running away from their decisions and heading to another city state to presumably do the exact same thing.
People in this thread keep focusing on the fact that they are leaving because it has become economically infeasible to live in these liberal cities/states. But you're ignoring the fact of why that is the case. Part of it has to do with the types of politicians they have been electing and the policies they promote. And these gay people have almost certainly been voting for those same politicians. And now they are running away from their decisions and heading to another city state to presumably do the exact same thing.
There aren't enough gay people to turn ANY red state blue. So who they vote for doesn't matter. And no one has ever been elected on the basis of the gay vote. Ever. To the extent gay people voted for "liberals" it was because they pass legislation that offered protection against discrimination in housing, employment, and education which were historically major issues.
It's just that "liberalism" and the Democrats moved away from caring about the working class and civil rights to be all about corporate interests and mingling with Hollywood celebrities. Pass gay marriage laws to look liberal (looking at you Cuomo) when the policies passed in NYC as far as jobs go (offshoring jobs, outsource jobs to temp agencies, giving real estate developers huge tax credits wiped out working class people including working class gays. And most gays are working poor).
Keep in mind Clinton neoliberalism is a very different kind of liberalism that you had from Presidents like Johnson.
Basically G-Dale got it right, it's now come down to people realizing that they have to deal with individual freedom (ability to survive) over identity politics/group identification as gay urbanities.
Why is this a bad thing? True progress is when people can be who they are and live anywhere they please.
The whole point of this thread is that a group of people that had a home in three coastal cities are now forced (for economic reasons) to leave and live elsewhere. As a result, they are not able to live "anywhere they please," at least not in these three cities.
The problem is that the recession of 2000 is still going strong for the middle class but politicians and those sitting in corporate boardrooms refuse to admit it.
Inflation is going strong (another unmentionable) but the rich never feel it.
Probably most of these shuttered bars closed because their rents increased four-fold.
Yes, it's news and needs to be pointed out. The cities that CLAIM to be so TOLERANT for "MINORITIES" including gays, have made it impossible for the majority of them to sustain living there long term. I bring this up because some leftists like to claim how intolerant the middle of the nation is, but more people are having to move to those places, where they can AFFORD housing and the general cost of living.
Actually, that rhetoric doesn't apply to to cities usually. Kentucky is a red state for instance, but Louisville went blue.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
