This is probably cold comfort for a lot of people (but why not?)

[bluestateguy]

Generational dynamics are on our side. Father Time is a beautiful thing. Americans under age 35 are much, much more accepting of gay persons, their right to serve openly in the military, to marry and to not be fired for their orientation. This is in marked contrast to Americans over the age of 60 (and sadly, these people do vote) who hold generally homophobic views. But every day that goes by (how can I put this gently?) will see more older, homophobic Americans leave us, as the proportion of voters born after 1975 will only grow.

And that will be reflected in the people we elect to public office and how they prioritize GLBT equality.

And take it easy, I am not referring to any of the nice older people here at DU, or your kindly old liberal mother or grandmother.

[Pithlet]

1. Why not make the age cutoff 40?

:P I say that because I'm 38. But I agree with you. Progress marches on.

[nomorenomore08]

2. You know, I'm sure most of us dearly love our older relatives.

But seeing as how their decline and death is (sadly) inevitable anyway, I suppose one might as well look on the bright side - which is to say, a lot of these folks will be taking their less-enlightened views with them when they pass. Call it insensitive if you want, but it's the basic truth.

[Arugula Latte]

3. The same dynamic is being seen in the loosening of opposition to legal pot.

As one pot activist said, "a lot of our opposition has simply died off."

[TexasObserver]

4. You're right. The most anti gay demo is the oldest.

You can plot it on a graph. As the age of the group gets younger, their acceptance of gay people is greater. That's one reason Lady Gaga is so important. She is plugged into grade schoolers to late 20s, big time.

In this current malaise, it's good to have a cause for our side the young can sink their teeth into.

[sofa king]

5. They're also less caucasian, less Christian, and much more literate.

You folks might think I'm kidding about that last part, but I think it's true. In the 1980s, I knew an entire demographic of beer-drinking, dope-smoking couch slugs who watched one of four television channels for six hours a night, who never read a book or a newspaper (but kept porno magazines) and couldn't be trusted to write out a phone number correctly, and who got away without comprehending a full paragraph for twenty years or more. Such a thing as the Internet would have been completely useless to people like that, and pretty much was.

But things change, and all those doofuses are now the wheelchair-riding teabaggers who are doing such a fine job of tossing us the election. It was fun watching them show up online in the late '90s and early '00s, ASKING THEIR QUESTIONS IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE IT'S TOO DIFFICULT TO USE THE SHIFT KEY, and still believing that the world still turned according to the 7pm national news. They never learned how to think, but they did learn how to read and write, sort of, and there are plenty of charlatans out there willing to lead them by the nose.

Today's younger generation is much more sophisticated. Widely read and capable of accessing information almost as fast as someone who has memorized the facts, they're clever enough to know that just because it's written down doesn't mean it's true. Many of them seem to view information exchange as a kind of reward, and if they find the information they're given to be spurious or a promise is not kept, they get upset and don't forget easily, unlike their parents.

The public record is also expanding dramatically. Now, a person's public statements and activities for the past fifteen years can be easily checked, and the record is getting larger in both directions all the time. Truly evil bastards with long and disturbing records, like Slade Gorton and Trent Lott, have a much harder time surviving now, and for the moment stupid seems to be the new evil in Republican vogue, stupidity having a certain kind of innocence which a candidate's diabolical handlers can never hope to fake. Thirty years ago a handful of people knew what a given Member of Congress' voting record was. Now, voters can check a voting record while waiting in line at the polls.

The GOP is running a dangerous gambit, hoping that a platform of flat-out deception will be enough to motivate their 23% sector of the population who believe anything to come out in high numbers in an otherwise uninteresting mid-term election. But then the Tea Partiers came along with a crew of idiot candidates who actually believe the GOP's deceptions and now they've gone and generated all sorts of interest, which is sure to be bad for them. For the moment, honesty, consistency, and competence are all things that can still be checked for and noted in a candidate, and the Republican Party has been fresh out of all those things since Richard Nixon came to town.

[Missy Vixen]

6. I'm fifty

Thanks for the broad brush generalizations. After all, nobody my age could actually accept anyone who isn't Caucasian, Republican and Christian, could they?

If our 83-year-old grandma was still able to speak, I'm thinking she'd have a lot to say about those broad brush generalizations, too. She hates bigotry and prejudice with every fiber of her being.

It's always enjoyable to know there are people who can't wait to celebrate your shuffling off this mortal coil, despite the fact you were voting and helping to elect Democratic candidates before they were even born.

:eyes:

[Javaman]

7. My mom was 86 when she died...

and supported gay rights.

While I understand the point you are trying to make, painting with broad brushes doesn't help.

Believe it or not, many people who are not members of DU and who are above the age of 60 are supports of gay rights.

While many people like to point that this may be a generational thing, I don't believe so. I believe it is a fear thing. Fear of all things different. And age doesn't not play a roll in that.

I have met and have known both young and old who fear gay people.

It has nothing to do with age, but instead ignorance.