Objective vs Subjective Freedom

First, I really want to say that I appreciate Chasin's contribution to this topic. I really think she has touched on some important issues. However, as I was reading, I did have a question for her: Is the problem here that the gay movement is fighting for rights in general or is it that even if they gained those rights, not all could access them equally?

To me, this is extremely important and it points to a distinction between objective and subjective freedom. The gay movement is pushing for objective freedom because they are asking for the same rights as everyone else. What seems more important, though, is the subjective freedom to actually take advantage of those rights. Chasin touches on this, though she uses slightly different language. It seems like her critique of the gay movements rests more on the need for subjective freedom rather than objective and she's right to say that the movements would need a lot of re-focusing in order to achieve this. This would require a more systemic change than simply passing a bill that grants rights to gays and lesbians. In order to be subjectively free, there has to be some measure of equality that enables access to carry out one's rights. Like she mentioned, it may be great to have rights, but if I don't have a lawyer to defend those rights or the education to understand them, then what has really been accomplished? So, basically, I agree with her on this point. The gay movement needs to go beyond rights if we expect social change that can really make an impact for everyone and not just a select few at the top. I also think that the way to do this is for all of the social justice movements to come together and start fighting together as one movement toward achieving not just rights, but subjective freedom for all.