Are Gay becoming Bourgeois or Have We Been So All Along?

Andrew Sullivan and other LGBT commentators have written columns and posts about the decline/death of "gay culture" in the past and now Jonah Goldberg (at left), someone who is hardly a typical ally of the LGBT rights movement, has a column in the Los Angeles Times which looks at the purported mainstreaming of LGBT citizens and how this "progress" in the arena of equality may speed the demise of a distinct gay culture - if there is such a thing in the lives of most of us. Goldberg states that the "sweeping embrace of bourgeois lifestyles by the gay community has been stunning" and offers the gay family on Modern Family as a case in point. The reality, of course, is that many in the LGBT community have been in long term marriage like relationships for decades. The boyfriend and I have a number of friends who have been in committed marriage like relationships for over 20 years - many of whom live very middle class, suburban lives. In my view, what Goldberg is focusing on is something that has , in fact, existed for many years - the straight community simply never knew it existed. Here are some column highlights:
*
With 'don't ask, don't tell' repealed and gays seeking marriage equality, the homosexual bourgeoisie is emerging — a concept subversive to both liberals and conservatives.
*
Two decades ago, the gay left wanted to smash the bourgeois prisons of monogamy, capitalistic enterprise and patriotic values and bask in the warm sun of bohemian "free love." And avant-garde values. In this, they were simply picking up the torch from the straight left of the 1960s and 1970s, who had sought to throw off the sexual hang-ups of their parents' generation along with their gray flannel suits.
*
The gay experiment with open bohemianism was arguably shorter. Of course, AIDS played an obvious and tragic role in focusing attention on the downside of promiscuity. But even so, the sweeping embrace of bourgeois lifestyles by the gay community has been stunning.
*
Nowhere is this more evident — and perhaps exaggerated — than in popular culture. Watch ABC's "Modern Family." The sitcom is supposed to be "subversive" in part because it features a gay couple with an adopted daughter from Asia. And you can see why both liberal proponents and conservative opponents of gay marriage see it that way. But imagine you hate the institution of marriage and then watch "Modern Family's" hardworking bourgeois gay couple through those eyes. What's being subverted? Traditional marriage, or some bohemian identity politics fantasy of homosexuality? By the way, according to a recent study, "Modern Family" is the No. 1 sitcom among Republicans. . .
*
Personally, I have always felt that gay marriage was an inevitability, for good or ill (most likely both). I do not think that the arguments against gay marriage are all grounded in bigotry, and I find some of the arguments persuasive. But I also find it cruel and absurd to tell gays that living the free-love lifestyle is abominable while at the same time telling them that their committed relationships are illegitimate too.
*
Many of my conservative friends often act as if there's some grand alternative to both the bohemian or the bourgeois lifestyles. But there isn't. And given that open homosexuality is simply a fact of life, the rise of the HoBos — the homosexual bourgeoisie — strikes me as good news.

*
I suspect Goldberg would view the boyfriend and I as HoBos based on our home and "lifestyle" - or maybe not since I write this blog and contribute to Bilerico and do my best to show the disingenuousness of Goldberg's conservative buddies.