West Hollywood Reacts to SCOTUS Gay Marriage Decision

Gay marriage supporters gathered outside West Hollywood's city hall June 26, 2013, to celebrate the day's Supreme Court decision repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and upholding a lower court's decision to reject Proposition 8.

Reason TV was there to take record of what this day felt like for gay people in West Hollywood and what they hope will come of the decisions.

Produced, shot and edited by Paul Detrick.

About 2:40.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to ReasonTV's YouTube Channel to receive notification when new material goes live.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Warrren||

    Can't imagine wanting to watch that.

  • Spanish||

    that's a smart way of making money this days. one of my mates is also making cash via web - he sell property in Spain in Torrevieja at http://topspanishhomes.com/pro.....torrevieja

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Nope. Hell, no. I might be bored as hell and on vacation, but there's no way I'm watching that.

  • Xenocles||

    My NPR station here in the central CA cost is full of lunatic progressives. This morning they were complaining about the DOMA decision and lamenting how the queer movement had gone astray, trying to achieve heteronormative values and such. It got me thinking:

    Gays have been marginalized for most of our history, so I wonder if that gave disproportionate strength to the gays on the fringe. You know, the ones who show their pride by dancing in the streets with strap-ons and chaps. All the gay people I know are pretty white-bread (one's a naval officer who just got engaged), and I suspect they represent the majority of gay people. Just otherwise normal people who are different because they are attracted to the same gender. So why are the longtime leaders of the gay rights movement complaining? I can only conclude that it's because their erstwhile followers are now being given the choice to join normal society and they're choosing to do so in droves. This necessarily saps the power of the lunatic gay fringe and is probably their main cause for concern.

  • Calidissident||

    Yeah, most of the gay people I know are not the overly flamboyant stereotype. Also, where in the Central Coast do you live?

  • Xenocles||

    Just moved to Monterey.

  • ||

    I'm originally from Santa Cruz. I'd much rather live there than here (Los Angeles), but I'm not about to job hunt in SC.

  • Xenocles||

    I used to do a lot of business travel to Manhattan Beach myself.

  • ||

    Let me know if you make it down this way again. Beer will be had.

  • Xenocles||

    I suspect I'll be back at least once in the next few years to visit some space people. I'll get the word out if I do.

  • Loki||

    Space people? I would have thought the aliens would just come straight to you. I mean, they flew across the galazy to meet you and then make you drive to LA? What a bunch of assholes.

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    I used to live in Carmel Valley. That place is amazingly beautiful and painfully expensive. Great place to live if you're going to live in California.

  • ||

    I would agree with this sentiment. I think there's probably a larger than average radically minded gay population partly because the radicals have been the face of homosexuality in America since '69 (prior to that the 'homophile movement' was very assimilationist). Being gay isn't like having a religion or a race because once you realize you're different you have to go track down people who are different like you are. If radicals are visible that's the direction you're going to start looking.

  • Xenocles||

    Thanks, Jesse. I was hoping for some feedback on that from a more inside perspective.

  • Lolo Stahko||

    I don't know many gay people personally,(I don't live in California) so I really don't know too much about the subject. However, I have read(in the NYT!) that over half of gay marriages are "open marriages." Just because they are capable of doing their laundry doesn't mean they have joined normal society.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01......html?_r=0

  • Tony||

    I'm young enough to have missed the awful days but old enough to lament the vanillafication of gay culture. My first experiences with the culture was with the seedier side of things--bars, parades, chatrooms--and that was a function of who my friends happened to be. Now gays who are just five years younger than me are basically heterosexuals in their social habits and in the things they like to talk about. With some exceptions, year after year the bars were filled with the same people, despite a new crop of 21-year-olds each year, presumably.

    I suppose every minority culture goes through the same thing as they are accepted into the mainstream. They lose parts of what make them interesting. But it's probably a good tradeoff.

  • Xenocles||

    "I suppose every minority culture goes through the same thing as they are accepted into the mainstream. They lose parts of what make them interesting."

    This is probably the same effect that we see when any two groups are allowed to mix. In general it's arguably America's singular cultural trait.

  • ||

    But now you can have straight women hanging out in gay leather bars because it's edgy and cool!

    Europe has been wrangling with the end of "gay spaces" for quite a while. I will say it makes it harder when you go up and start hitting on a guy in a gay bar and find out he's straight, but just likes the ambiance or something.

  • fried wylie||

    I will say it makes it harder when you go up and start hitting on a guy in a gay bar and find out he's straight

    Oh, you mean just like how people of compatible orientations get rejected all the time?

    Or was it really a culture of "hey, we're both gay, let's fuck based on that factor alone!"

  • fried wylie||

    Or was it really a culture of "hey, we're both gay, let's fuck based on that factor alone!"

    In which case it sexual orientation isn't really at issue, but rather the participants' sexual in-discrimination.

  • ||

    I'm sorry your bitter about getting rejected at bars all the time wylie. From a pure numbers perspective you have 90+% of women to fail miserably with. Out of every 10 women you hit on 9 or more of them will have a compatible sexual orientation and you can move straight on to the uncomfortable possibility of rejection due to poor hygiene or an inability to articulate yourself.

    Gay folks don't have the luxury of numbers on their side like you do, so we have the complications of human interaction and a smaller pool to work with.

  • fried wylie||

    I'm sorry your bitter about getting rejected at bars all the time wylie.

    Lacking State Issued ID my entire life, I don't visit many bars. And I wouldn't try to meet women there if I did. I wanna meet a chick who's a physicist or engineer.

    Thanks for playing The Generalization Game, we hope you enjoy your consolation prizes.

  • ||

    I think this is where the kids say "cool story bro" but I've never been that hip.

  • wwhorton||

    My best man, an aerospace engineer, met his fiancee, a chemistry professor, at a local dive bar they both frequented. And in his case, I do mean frequent. In fact, of the three engineers I know, all three go to bars.

    Nerds have fun, too, you know...

  • wwhorton||

    And hey, wait a minute, I met my wife at a bar and we just celebrated another anniversary. Ours, in fact. So maybe you shouldn't turn your nose up at people you meet in bars.

  • Tony||

    In fried's defense, he does have to deal with women.

    Not that poor hygiene would be any less an issue if he were gay.

  • Tony||

    Surely there will remain some utility to having "gay" bars for that reason alone. The boundaries are becoming more blurred in my city, as gay culture is merging with "arts" culture, etc., and the spaces are merging as well.

    I envision an annoying future. Gays and 100% tolerant straights in the same places, constantly trying to figure out who is what.

  • fried wylie||

    constantly trying to figure out who is what

    Which is totally different than straight men and women constantly trying to figure out who WANTS what.

  • Xenocles||

    I had a similar response to men who objected to the end of DADT because they might get hit on. Basically they object to the possibility of experiencing what all women do every day. Never mind the fact that I don't think gay men really hit on men indiscriminately.

  • Tony||

    Mostly I just don't want annoying drunk bitches clogging up my bars. Straight men can stop in all they want, as long as they aren't dicks.

    Besides straight men are easier lays.

  • fried wylie||

    Besides straight men are easier lays.

    Not according to Robby in I Love You Man

  • califernian||

    The shirt at 1:25 is the most nauseating thing I have seen all year.

  • Hugh Akston||

    I'm not gonna watching it, but I'm guessing it's a bunch of people who are woefully misinformed of what the decision actually covers?

  • Tony||

    Yes why would gay people be any more informed about these decisions than libertarians?

  • Lolo Stahko||

    I'd bet the average person here knows more about Christianity than the average Christian. Same with issues of homosexual recognition.

  • Tony||

    Libertarians are libertarians' idea of what smart people are.

  • MoMark||

    Why thank you Tony!

  • Loki||

    Yes why would gay people be any more informed about these decisions than libertarians anyone else?

    FTFY

    On the local news last night they lead off their coverage of this story with "the Supreme Court today made a controversial desision to overturn DOMA." They eventually got it right in the actual piece, but I suspect a lot of people had probably either tuned out because they don't care, or because they were too busy either celebrating to listen to the whole story, or frantically boarding up their doors to keep the marauding hordes of gays who are known to prowl the night looking for heterosexual families to destroy with the magical powers of gay buttsecks (sarcasm, if it isn't obvious); depending on which side of the issue they're on.

    Thanks for yet again proving what an insufferable snobish prick you are though.

  • Tony||

    I think my point is that gay people have a direct stake in the matter, and it might not be surprising if they were actually more informed of the particulars than average. I probably misinterpreted Hugh's sentiment.

    And I don't have a snobbish bone in my body.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I still think Americans would be happier in the long run if our various groups didn't feel the intense desire for bureaucratic approval.

  • fried wylie||

    or even public acceptance.

    I like to game to an extent that public health officials would consider Bad, but I seek neither theirs or the general populaces acceptance.

  • Nooge.||

    Early picks up the soap.

    Watch this instead.

  • H. Protagonist||

    I'm happy for them.

    I'm unhappy, however, with a large percentage of them supporting the efforts of the California legislature to take away my Constitutional rights.

  • Lolo Stahko||

    Compare the Reason reaction over homoseuxal marriage to the Reason reaction to the bill banning "gay-conversion." I'd say the latter is a more serious civil rights violation.

  • Anders||

    Man, California has enough problems. No need to highlight some place like West Hollywood.

    Are you trying to make the world even more Californiphobic?

    Sheesh.

  • Lolo Stahko||

    Good, does this have to have the picture of the women kissing? At least in this case it's women. Recently I saw one of those "VOTE NOW" ads that had two homosexual men almost kissing. Why? They would never have an obscene ad like that of a naked woman. Who decided that homosexual PDA wasn't obscenity? I'm going to write a letter to Google about this and I suggest everyone else join me. Children don't need to be seeing that.

  • Tony||

    All PDA is rude, but hardly an obscenity.

  • wwhorton||

    Well, not ALL. I mean, two people kissing each other or hugging briefly isn't quite the same as two people having a snogging session in the middle of the street.

    But I totally agree about the obscenity aspect. When I was younger it might have wigged me out a little bit, but at the ripe old age of 35 I've just got more shit to worry about than two people kissing each other. And, frankly, two people engaged in full on porn in the middle of the sidewalk would just annoy me to the extent that I had to step over them.

    And, Lolo. The world will not end because your precious snowflake sees some butt touching. Really. The odds are better that you'll produce a serial rapist or the next Ted Bundy by traumatizing your child about the sinfulness of sexual contact than they are that you'll produce a stripper by not covering your child's eyes while two people in love (or lust, or drunk) kiss each other.

  • fried wylie||

    I tried getting into Torchwood. Too much dudes-kissing.

    Not that I don't want Capt. Jack to get a piece, I just don't need to see it.

  • JWatts||

    I didn't really think it had too much dudes-kissing. However, it did suffer from a drastic decline in plot quality.

  • fried wylie||

    it did suffer from a drastic decline in plot quality.

    I didn't make it that far.

  • Loki||

    Who decided that homosexual PDA wasn't obscenity?

    Probably the same people who decided that showing straights kissing wasn't "obscene" and the same heathens who green-lit Kirk and Uhura's smooching on Star Trek all those years ago. /sarc

  • Xenocles||

    They didn't air the kiss. To pacify the network Roddenberry had it shot two ways, and the network aired the shot where they turn their heads from the camera without actually kissing.

  • Tman||

    An old classic from the Onion.

    http://www.theonion.com/articl.....-gays,351/

  • MoMark||

    God I hate being straight!

  • fried wylie||

    You get used to it. I don't even think about my straightness most days.

  • MoMark||

    They get to show their emotions to the nth degree, wear what they want, speak with whatever affectations they choose, and let’s not even mention the sex. I mean really, I go to these gay parties sometimes and these bastards really look like they are having a good time. Even the women I know seem to like gay men more than straights. I feel like I am stuck in the iron fist of heterosexualism.

  • fried wylie||

    My emotional palette consists mostly of rage. Wearing tshirts and fleece pants. I prefer clearly articulated speech free of affectation or accent.

    Maybe you just need to practice more.

  • Tony||

    Being a gay man means never having to lie about what you want. I imagine it's relatively liberating. I could never handle dealing with the complexities of women, and I pity all the straight men I see who seem to be utterly miserable. Not only do they have to deal with women, they have to deal with conventions of monogamy and such. Our little secret is that--as long as we survive high school, and many of us don't--being gay is a fuckton of fun.

  • ||

    I think you're overselling the gay life. Some communications issues are cleared up by default but you're still working with two flawed human beings trying to make things work. I've had too many straight friends laugh at my relationship stories and say "well that's good to know, I always assumed it'd be easier" to believe otherwise.

  • cavalier973||

    So...do gay men never have to worry about "the headache"?

    I don't understand same-sex attraction, but I understand lust, and I figured that same-sex attraction was partly based on having partners who were always willing.

  • ||

    So...do gay men never have to worry about "the headache"?

    I've known straight couples where the woman's libido was significantly higher than the man's.

    I dated a guy who was a night owl and I'm ready to pass out at 10pm. I'd be ready to go at 8:30 and he'd want to watch some more TV, but then be peevish when I was half asleep and he was getting randy, so yeah, mismatched libidos happen.

    I figured that same-sex attraction was partly based on having partners who were always willing.

    Er, I think that's a bit backwards. I've known some "straight" guys who don't mind fooling around with a guy if they strike out with women at any particular point (conversations about whether that makes them bi or not get surreal very quickly), but I think in most cases the higher rate of willingness to get jiggy is just a bonus, not an incentive.

  • cavalier973||

    Er, I think that's a bit backwards. I've known some "straight" guys who don't mind fooling around with a guy if they strike out with women at any particular point

    I would argue that confirms, rather than refutes, my observation. If a "straight" guy is willing to fool around with another guy, then he must feel some sort of same-sex attraction.

  • ||

    Right, I was more trying to get ahead of possible objections to my larger point that gay people are gay because they're attracted to men. I think that attraction becomes more or less fixed before they have a concept of "easy", so I don't think men being easy generally plays into the formation of that attraction.

    For "straight" guys I'd argue that they have an existing underlying attraction to men, but it isn't pressing enough compared to perceived social stigma to force them to flip that switch and call themselves gay or even bi. At points where they've had a few drinks and are feeling lonely that urge spikes up over social stigma and they go home with a dude.

  • Loki||

    It's West Hollywood. I'm sure there were lots of rainbow flags, dancing in the streets, dudes running around in assless chaps ... and then they heard about the Supreme Court decision.

  • JWatts||

    I'm still a little numb after reading this story:

    http://reason.com/24-7/2013/06.....ents-to-pr

  • ||

    It does have massive levels of fuckupedness. You would hope the teachers union would issue a strong policy statement against it. I won't hold my breath

  • Polo Ralph Lauren outlet||

    This should be their freedom, we should not try to interfere.
    Ray Ban 2013 http://www.2013rayban.it/
    Oakley occhiali http://www.oakley-occhiali.org/

  • Polo Ralph Lauren outlet||

    In one respect we support them legally is not good, it will feel that our society has become a mess.
    Ray Ban España http://www.xn--rayban-espaa-khb.com/
    Oakley occhiali http://www.oakley-occhiali.org/

  • ||

    Cops support the wearing of body cameras. Cops support recording their stops etc. because it protects us from false claims and offers good evidence to support what we write in our reports...

    http://www.policeone.com/polic.....n-cameras/

  • wwhorton||

    I can't see the connection, unless this is some sort of roundabout reference to the Village People...

  • chexsystem||

    I think that people will do more than they used to. any problem will be solved successfully. good luck!

  • Polo Ralph Lauren outlet||

    Coût pages concurrentes enseignement complet 5. Un individu a une période de temps se awnser optimale hte avec battement supplémentaire de votre éducation. (Acquérir les aspects de la façon dont les awnsers droite.
    New Era
    New Era France
    Casquette New Era

  • timbo||

    Finally, gay people can be openly gay in CA. Enough already. Gay people, women and black people have all the rights and then some. With the exception of gay marriage prohibition, which is wrong, what injustices exist for minorities in America? Just strive for free markets and small government and you will find that the rest works itself out. In the meantime, give this shit a rest. We now have to hear about gayness in men's sports. What is next, bow hunting for gay deer?

  • timbo||

    Unions and politicians are the scourge of the earth.

Click here to follow Reason on Instagram

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE