Acceptance or Respect?

In class this week there was talk of acceptance and respect of the homosexual community. What is meant by respect and what is meant by acceptance? Can there be respect before acceptance and what exactly makes respect different in the first place? Some would contend that they could be interchangeably used, but with careful evaluation it is clear that respect holds a much deeper meaning and brings understanding and action to a whole new level. Acceptance by definition says that it is the act of having a “favorable reception” or “approval.” I contended, that the definition of acceptance and respect would ultimately change as time progressed when referring to members of the LGBT community because as most oppressed parties realize, they must take the baby steps given by the oppressors until they can reach a happy medium in some possibly distant future.

That being said, I would contend also that the acceptance that the pioneers of the gay movement wanted was much less acceptance than it was tolerance. From the definition of acceptance there still lies that need for a favorable reception, which is a large leap from complete oppression and disgust. Tolerance on the other hand is quite different, and seemingly much more on the lines of what the early movements strived toward. Tolerance asks for a non-oppressive, fair, and permissive reception, where as acceptance still awaits a favorable reception.

Another contention I would make is that members of the LGBT community still struggle for tolerance alone nevertheless acceptance and then respect. Examples of how even tolerance, which it could be argued has honestly been attained and we are thus on the way to acceptance, are easily found. One common and popular example is the issue of gay marriage. Also in class it was brought up some of the popular reasons how heterosexuals “on the side of the gays” validate their claims for gay marriage. A particularly interesting argument is “They can’t help what they are so we cannot discriminate what they are because of it.” While this is actually compelling and in most rights could be thought of as true, at what point does that view just resort back to homosexuality as pathology?

While the stance at hand may yield results, at what price do members of the LGBT community pay? After hard working individuals in the past worked to shake the stigma of sickness for their identity, what would they say if today’s generation simply reverted back to it in order to obtain rights? That then brings up respect; would the pioneers that worked so hard to free members of the LGBT community of that stigma respect their descendants? Then if there cannot be respect within ones own community, how can they then ask respect of others, especially ones that oppress them?

With the lack of an active and powerful LGBT movement now, actively fighting for rights with protests, demonstrations, etc, like the 1960’s what is to be said for the dreams of acceptance and respect? Society’s current state would seem to be a loosely kept sense of tolerance, that there are institutionally rules and laws against discrimination, but it is still widespread. Can the LGBT community ever move toward the once avidly aspired goal of acceptance and then possibly respect one day?