Thank you for this.  As a Black woman who is a het, but advocate for civil rights, period, I have been really appalled by Andrew Sullivan’s constant harangue against Black people in his blog over at the Atlantic.  It got so bad that I stopped reading his column and removed his blog from google reader.

Prop 8 is bad business, but it isn’t like California doesn’t have a history of voting in bad propositions.  Prop 187 and 209 were propositions that disenfranchised people and had ill effects on civil rights.  I wasn’t particularly surprised when Prop 8 passed - especially since the Mormon and Catholic churches were behind it.

Nate over at 538 has a marvelous post a few weeks back on voting patterns and African Americans and first time voters:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/prop-8-myths.html

I guess some people just love to stir up shit, especially about a movement that they find interesting, but not dangerously strong. I don’t really know why these people wrote this editorial, but I would imagine the reasons the NYT published it are something like that… it’s controversial and therefore interesting, and the Marriage Equality movement isn’t strong enough to make it publishing it disadvantageous to the NYT. Seriously, think of it from the New York Times’ perspective. What do they lose by publishing an article criticizing those wierd, gay, unorganized, activist people? And showing how they fight with those exotic, inner-city, Church-going proletarian blacks?

Such an essay allows the apathetic, scared, and submissive US public to feel momentarily superior to pro-gay activists & blacks alike, and creates controversy with its attendant pageviews and ‘stickiness’ as people gets invested in the controversy. Win/win. It also carefully avoids offending the Mormon church, which could actually make a stink about the New York Times & hurt revenues. People often assume that the mass media is on the side of pro-equality movements. The reality is somewhat different.

Barbara, you managed to get through the primary campaign with Sullivan? I got through maybe a month of “Hillary Clinton is the bitch-queen of hell” before discarding him permanently.

This is the kind of fight that I sadly assume the press will run with. Of course, I’ve been wrong before, as I expected them to take a negative/Gore/Kerry-tack to Obama’s run.

AndresH,

Here’s the thing:  I only started reading Sullivan after the Democratic convention, so apparently I missed a whole lot of stuff!  His crazy, constant harangues against Palin were what brought me to him.  I didn’t realize that was his default way of seeing the world - Palin or no.

I agree that the article you are reacting to is ignorant, and that blaming without attempting (or at least recognizing the real need for) open communications about the issue is beyond unproductive.

I need to take issue with two of your points, though.

The first is the other side of the coin for the meme you’re saying won’t die - which is that racism is the only or even the most significant reason for complaining about the black vote against Prop 8 and/or homophobia within the black community. Of course there’s racism, and some of it disgustingly overt.

But for a lot of us, the part we have the trouble wrapping our heads around isn’t about race. It is about how openly and in many cases viciously both the rank and file and the leadership of a group that has spent my lifetime working for equality - almost universally talking about “equality for all people” - is in so many cases clearly indicating that they didn’t actually mean it. Even the existence of the controversy about whether “civil rights apply to gays” is mindblowing. The fact that is was so shocking to so many shows a naivte about the black community, no doubt.

All too many people are responding to the issue with racist reactions. And I am all too aware that I am saddened to say that if the positions were reversed, white gay people would probably disappoint me even worse as a group.

But just because the response takes on racist overtones, it is an error to assume, or to speak as though you assume, that the underlying cause of the hostility arises in all cases from racism as a cause.

The communications you are speaking about, the ones that need to happen, the ones that are long overdue, can’t start from the place of saying to gay people “you’re all racists, so let’s work on that first.” It certainly does have to include the dialogue with and within the gay community that starts with “clearly, you were assuming that the black community felt some common cause with the gay community. Why? What efforts has the gay community made, what efforts have YOU made to justify that feeling? Right or wrong, it doesn’t come free.”

The second point I take issue with is the idea that a discussion about the black vote on Prop 8 have to always include, and be overwhelmed by, issues with the Mormon, Catholic, or any other group. This blog validly, repeatedly makes the point that not all issues about what women face or that women have must be discussed with equal time given to the parallel men’s issues, and yet no discussion about black voters is allowed without talking about the white ones.

I don’t think anyone can sensibly make the case that the LDS or the Catholic Church has in any way been given a pass on Prop 8.

Of course most Mormons are white, and yes, they bankrolled it. The surprise, if there was one, was that they threw so much effort and money behind it.

But it isn’t unreasonable to separate out black Democrats and discuss them separately on this, and no, people haven’t forgotten the white anti-gay votes or machine. But still, would any other identifiable sub-group within the Democratic party get so vehemently defended for voting so out of line with party goals?  Anti-choice Democrats get ripped here all the time. Why not anti-gay Democrats?

Can I also point out that the very fact that there were so many people stirred up, misinformed, and even unreasonable at your panel discussion simply proves that you were spending your time on something that actually mattered, and you were presenting it to people who needed you to present it? It’s always more pleasant to preach to the choir, but it sounds like you did a hell of a job doing a good thing where it was needed. In all seriousness, thanks for that.

Wow, that opinion piece makes some wild assumptions, especially the counterfactual about Hillary Clinton. It’s true that homophobic black preachers need to take some blame for contributing to the passage of Prop 8, but long before we get to them there are far more serious issues to settle up with the Mormon elders and Catholic bishops and evangelical fundy ministers. Take the efforts of any one of those groups out of the mix and there would have been no margin for African American voters to “make.”

you assume, that the underlying cause of the hostility arises in all cases from racism as a cause.

It’s hard to discount it in the cases I’ve encountered (and I did not say all cases of responses to Prop 8). Nor is bringing up the matter of racism mean I’m calling everyone who criticizes the homophobic black church racists. That’s a knee-jerk response to bringing up race in any form or fashion because too many of us are made so uncomfortable by the topic that their pain sensors are dialed up way too high. That’s the dark side of our politically correct culture - an inability to discuss the impact of race rationally—to the point, as these op-ed authors did, of discounting class, education and religion. They clearly didn’t do it purposely, it’s too overt—that nonsense was a visceral reaction that made it into print.

In any case, if you had had the opportunity to attend my panel session, you would have heard that there was ample time given to talking about the issue of the LGBT movement expecting blacks to “be there” on the former’s issues, when in many cases the LGBT movement is nowhere to be found when it comes to social justice issues affecting communities of color that do not affect them directly. There is a lack of trust that can be eliminated by more coalition building, less blame and defensiveness (on the part of the religious black community) and active listening to one another. There needs to be a connection made that civil rights is not a zero sum game or grounds for oppression olympics. Discrimination is discrimination whether it is about race or sexual orientation, and working in silos measuring one’s “group” in terms of oppression level is insane.

It’s particularly noticeable in this case if like me, you’re black and gay. It’s painful watching the lack of communication in both communities and people like me rendered invisible because it’s too inconvenient to their arguments and complaints against one another.

And that’s why I’m willing to put myself in the crossfire. It’s too bad too few want to join me because of mounting frustration with either or both sides, or fear of getting out of their comfort zones.

Pam,

Here’s a sincere question. Even if “mainstream” LGBT organizations took seriously issues like poverty and economic justice, police brutality and profiling, education and work opportunities, what indication is there that the clergy who were/are out there against gay people and marriage equality wouldn’t remain opposed?  After all, the Pope is still a big-ass bigot, and the Bishops here in MA are following right in line, and there’s likely been more interaction between Catholic and gay leaders here in the Bay State….We are, in the eyes of all these clergy, immoral and broken and engaging in evil and not deserving of civil rights—no matter how much work on the right side of issues that are of concern to our opponents.

So….how did seven percent of the California population do more damage than the roughly forty percent who pushed through Prop 8? Is my arithmatic that bad? Seven percent——assuming that you know, somebody asked every black person who voted how they voted——doesn’t equal forty percent. Get some conservative over here to help me! In terms of blaming, does that mean a black voter is five times more blameworthy than a rich white one?

I don’t think it’s really right to blame black Californians for the passage of Proposition 8, but it should be noted that blacks were among the many groups that did vote for it more than against it.  I can think of a series of possible answers why, and I would hope that they don’t vote that way again, but this blame game should be focused on the whole of Californians, not just upon blacks.

Black homophobia is a problem.  But is it much worse than it is among Evangelical Christians, Mormons, or Republicans?  I have a hard time thinking so.  However, with the right kind of outreach, blacks can become convinced that equality for gays can be part of a larger struggle.  It’ll be a hard sell, even among the many gays who have carved a niche for themselves in communities that aren’t often as diverse as a rainbow flag, to get blacks involved in the mainstream gay rights movement which can be about as white as many Republican potlucks in Iowa.

Really, the problem is generic homophobia.  The fear is not based on race, class, religion, or anything else nearly as much as it is based on ignorance.  Young people, who have lived among out homosexuals for most if not all of their lives, voted against the proposition in large numbers.  That’s where the future is, and that’s the base to grow from.

I guess you have more faith in clergy than I do.

That was too flippant.

I understand what you’re saying.  And, I’ve seen local coalitions in which POC organizations and LGBT organizations are parts of broader coalitions. 

However, I also quite simply think there is a fetishization of coalition.  We are all too small to do the work on our own, but there really is no reason to think that working together in coalition will make anti-gay people any less anti-gay.  It certainly hasn’t happened with regard to the RCC. And here in Boston, the Black Ministerial Alliance is equally—and perhaps even moreso when it comes to rhetoric—anti-gay than the RCC Bishops.  I see no reason whatsover to assume that working together would lessen their hostility and opposition to gay inclusion, much less any form of equality.

Little known fact.  There are no white people in California.  Gay marriage rights failed because the black state of California voted against it.  If Prop 8 passed by a 51% - 49% margin, it proves that all blacks hate all gays and that liberalism as we know it is inherently dysfunctional.

So everyone who assumes that people can just get along is wrong.  We should just give the blacks and the gays military grade weapons and let them settle it Second Amendment style.  And then Jesus can sweep down and wipe California off the face of the earth, thus making America a better place.  The end.

:-p

Seriously, wedge-issue politics never dies with the GOP.  When they’re not claiming Obama hates women, they’re peddling this black people hate gay people crap.  Or perhaps pushing the unions hate illegal immigrants canard.  Or just playing the class warfare card and trying to rile up the hippies against the coastal elitists.

When you’ve got no political platform on which to build your house, all that you can do is chip away at your neighbor’s foundations in hopes it’ll bring him down to your level.

As a Black woman who is a het, but advocate for civil rights, period, I have been really appalled by Andrew Sullivan’s constant harangue against Black people in his blog over at the Atlantic.

Andrew Sullivan was the one who was most responsible for promoting The Bell Curve back in the day.  He is, quite frankly, a fucking racist and always has been.  His harangues about African-Americans were primarily responsible for the passage of Prop 8 fits exactly in with his racial views, particularly since people who’ve actually looked at the statistics (like the above link to Nate Silver) have pointed out that the primary predictor for who would vote for Prop 8 was age, not race.  The older the voter was, the more likely they were to vote in favor of it.

But I guess we can’t get all angry at our grandparents for continuing to be homophobes, so it’s easier to direct our anger outward to those bad, bad black people.

I would think that people who attended church especially evangelical churches were probably more likely to vote for Prop 8, I wonder if church attendance is higher among black voters than whites.  At some point I remember reading that a disproportionate number of blacks were against teaching evolution for the same reason.
Maybe their is a religion problem in the black community.

jon wrote “Black homophobia is a problem.  But is it much worse than it is among Evangelical Christians, Mormons, or Republicans?”

Probably not, but it does need to be addressed differently because demographically speaking blacks are mostly Democrats, and mostly fall into the socially progressive side of issues.  You expect Republicans, Mormons (who overwhelmingly vote Republican and are overwhelmingly socially conservative), etc to vote against civil rights.  That the vast majority of black voters in California voted against civil rights is surprising because in general you can count on the vast majority of black voters to vote for the liberal/progressive side of things.  Its easy for people who haven’t been paying attention (Hi Dan Savage!) to see the easily predictable voter demographics as a betrayal because it is so shocking, so surprising.  Of course, the shock and surprise are results of ignorance, the endemic homophobia of the black community is hardly secret.

Trying to address homophobia in Republicans, or Mormons, or other majority conservative/Republican groups is going to be done differently than trying to address homophobia in the black community.

Hell, no less a person than Bill Cosby launched into a screed about why it’d be a good idea to murder gay people at one of his recent college pep rallies.  He said “But we are in a new time, where people are behaving in abnormal ways and calling it normal … When they used to come into our neighborhoods, we put the kids in the basement, grabbed a rifle, and said, ‘By any means necessary.’”  This was cheered by the audience.  He also had some pretty unpleasant things to say about women in the same speech. [1]

Obviously the racist outpouring from some people is wrong, and (possibly more important) counterproductive.  Equally obviously there is a problem with homophobia in the black community, and that problem needs to be addressed, and addressed in a different way than we try to address the problem with homophobia among more traditionally conservative groups.

Honestly I’m not sure its really possible to solve the problem of homophobia in conservative groups except the way the problem of opposition to miscegenation was solved: ignore their petty wining, force the liberal/progressive position over their objections, and in 20 years they’ll pretend they never objected.

I think it should be easier to reduce homophobia in the black community because, on most other issues, the substantial majority are quite liberal.  It should be easier to convince a person who agrees with 90% of liberalism to accept that final 10% than it is to convince someone (an average Mormon, say) who rejects close to 100% of liberalism to end their homobigotry.

[1] Can’t find the transcript online, just quotes from this article: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200805/cosby

I’m not Black, and I’m not formally educated about the Black community, but I have read some stuff about homophobia in the Black community and have a question. From what I have read, it seems like homophobia in the Black community is more about the taboo of being Black and gay within the Black community. I don’t read a lot of stuff about Black people being concerned with the sexuality of people in other racial and ethnic communities. Basically, if you’re Black and gay, you’ll be looked down upon in the Black community for whatever reason (maybe for the same reasons MLK and Betty Friedan were homophobic). But if you’re anything else and gay, then the Black community isn’t too bothered (unless on religious grounds). So is that the case? Are African Americans more concerned with gay African Americans than gays in general?

I think the whole Prop 8 situation was deplorable. I was out in CA before the elections and I talked with non-homophobic CA voters who fully intended to vote for it based on their belief that CA judges went over voters’ heads with the prior vote. I called out the inherent bigotry in Prop 8 and it sailed right past these people on their way out to dinner with gay couples. WTF????? I still don’t get that one.

The other fallacy, one I subscribe to for economy’s sake when trying to do something more than simple addition, is that one would expect Obama voters to be pro-gay marriage, and McCain voters the opposite. The ban on gay marriage outperformed McCain by 12 points (?), so the most striking differential is highlighted: African-Americans voted for Obama 95-5 but for gay marriage only 30-70, a 65-point difference. But if they were only 7 percent of the population, that’s a 4.5% swing, only a fraction of the 12 point overall swing.

As for that Jack Black video that was posted on EVERY SINGLE SITE I read last week, they do realize the vote was last month, right?

I called out the inherent bigotry in Prop 8 and it sailed right past these people on their way out to dinner with gay couples.

And, if they had been my friends, voting for Prop 8 would ensure they were no longer my friends. They would be purged from my life.

As for that Jack Black video that was posted on EVERY SINGLE SITE I read last week, they do realize the vote was last month, right?

Don’t get me started on the supreme awfulness of the No on 8 campaign.  I have rarely seen a group take a 15-point lead on an issue and yet blow it as thoroughly as those idiots did.

When your campaign revolves around saying, “We know everyone hates gay people, but what about civil rights?” you’re basically trying to lose.  I want my goddamn money back.

Stuff like this makes me think about partisans who when they associate themselves with one political party, they buy that party’s agenda whole hog.  My dad wants low taxes.  I can understand that.  But he’s an atheist who occassionally smokes pot, and has been divorced three times.  The last person in the world you’d expect to hear lecture anyone else on the sanctity of marriage.  But he buys it.  He doesn’t think gays should be allowed to marry.  And I look at Republicans, and I wonder all the time why is it the economic conservatives buy the social stuff, and the social conservatives buy the economic stuff?  It’s not like they’re naturally complimentary.

I think what this op ed reflects is that the Democratic side doesn’t have this same level of mind control.  We have components of our coalition who are only in for part of the agenda.  And I think especially on these civil rights issues, we pick up groups of voters for whom one issue is the most important thing.  LGBT’s because we support LGBT’s.  Black voters because we’re supportive of their concerns.  Latinos, because we’re not openly hostile to immigration or people speaking Spanish in public.  But within those groups, on all the other issues, LGBT’s, or Blacks, or Latinos, or labor, or whatever, aren’t necessarily more or less liberal than anyone else.

And, if they had been my friends, voting for Prop 8 would ensure they were no longer my friends. They would be purged from my life.

And I don’t blame you one bit.

I got through maybe a month of “Hillary Clinton is the bitch-queen of hell” before discarding him permanently.

You know what kills me?  Sullivan heaped praise on black voters for choosing Obama over Hillary and helping him overtake her in the primaries.  Now the worm has turned and he’s berating black people regularly.

Although I can’t say I’m surprised.  He’s one of those white people who thinks he knows what’s wrong with black America and what has to be done about it.  In short:  black people just need to stop being “victims”.  And, of course, the guy isn’t even from this country.  What the fuck does he even know about American race relations?

Andrew Sullivan was the one who was most responsible for promoting The Bell Curve back in the day.

He wants to believe it.  Sullivan is heavily invested in the idea that poor people deserve to be poor, because they’re stupid and stuff.  Sure, he thinks private charity should keep those people from starving to death, but his opposition to social welfare beyond food stamps can be traced back to that one belief.  It’s really amazing to see this shit coming from a Catholic.  He really needs to just convert to Calvinism already.

I have to wonder if black and Latino gay people are more likely to be stranded, financially speaking, and unable to do what a lot of white gay people do, which is move to neighborhoods that are more open to homosexuality.  Money and the closet is an issue that I don’t hear discussed enough.

Here’s the thing…a minority of white gay people can afford to move to those neighborhoods.

The media images we see—and the people selected to represent our political organizations—are almost always economically privileged.  I see this hardcore in my dissertation work. There are a couple examples that keep coming back to me. One is an article discussing one of the couples who sued the state, and how each of the men in the couple was taking down $60k, but the inability to marry was costing them in taxes and their ability to save for their daughter’s education (and potentially when it came to a pension).  That $120K income put them in the top 12% of households in the U.S.  The other one, and this is more frivolous, is that goddamned matching Armani pantsuits worn by the Goodridges in their wedding that were discussed in the national media and the Boston media. 

Yeah, we’re all pulling in top 15% incomes and dressing in Armani.  BLECH.

Gay people, as a group, are not economically privileged, though.  Most academic studies show that there is a wage penalty associated with non-heterosexuality. Now, that will be compounded when you look at how sexuality is co-constitutive with other systems of domination.  You’re right, we don’t talk about class enough.  It’s not just the closet, though. It’s participation in gay cultures.  Since everything is so commodified, and oriented to those near the top, those of us without a ton of income are left out of participating in broader queer-identified activities.  It’s hard to go out dancing if you can’t really afford the cover charge…or the ticket to the HRC black-tie ball.

By and large most white folks don’t have to deal with minorities on anything other than a superficial level (how many have relationships with POC that are close enough to have deep conversations about race?), and they certainly aren’t required to be steeped in those cultures to get by in society at large.

This should actually cut in favor of gays, because while few white folks have a POC family member, a lot more white folks have a gay family member. And knowing that Uncle Pete is gay or that Grandma Sue is lesbian is just something that the family learns to respect and accept. When you go to Grandma’s for Christmas, you bring a gift for “Aunt” Betty as well. So Pam and Amanda are absolutely right—come out of the closet to your friends and neighbors, because it’s extremely hard to deny rights to people you know well.

One is an article discussing one of the couples who sued the state, and how each of the men in the couple was taking down $60k, but the inability to marry was costing them in taxes

Unlikely unless the marriage penalty has truly been eliminated. The marriage penalty hit hardest couples earning equal incomes.

I know anecdote =/= data, but every rally I have gone to has had a small group of counter protesters, all of whom seem to be of the blond/blue set that I saw out waving pro prop 8 signs at suburban street corners before the election.

It’s unfortunate that no one is parsing the other side of this coin, i.e. racism in the gay community, which is and always has been rampant. A few years back John Aravosis released a shit storm in his comments section when he made disparaging comments about Rep. Cynthia McKinney in one of his posts, who at the time was embroiled in a pseudo-controversy over “assaulting” a guard at the Capitol. Aravosis’ comments came after a number of other racially insensitive remarks, including his whole hearted approval of the handcuffing of an unruly African American kindergardener. A few of his more impassioned critics, myself included, got censored, then banned by recovering Republican Aravosis. I have a game I like to play called “count the faces”. Go to any gay business in any major American city and pick up the free gay publications they offer. Go through it and make a tally of the number of faces pictured. Go through again and count the number of Black faces pictured. With this information calculate a statistical analysis. It will sicken you. I realize this is hardly scientific and parses a very slim portion of the gay community, probably just a grade above the anecdotal, but it certainly is informative. If you were to apply the same information to a mainstream medium like television, it would elicit howls of disapproval. I am concerned about the number of Blacks who voted for Prop 8, being a Californian, but I blame the nefarious influences of religion, not some intrinsic hate thing going on in the Black community. We as gays would do better to expand our outreach to the Black community rather than grousing and taking seriously idiotic conclusions like the one under discussion.

“Protecting traditional marriage” is a homophobic statement used to express bigotry.  It’s what we in the business of speaking English like to call a euphemism.

No kidding.  I pine for the day when a TV talking head hears those words and immediately fires back to the fundie who says it, “protect traditional marriage… from what?”

I don’t know what exactly they’re trying to protect it from or against.  I don’t in anyway see how the inclusion of an entire oppressed community in a basic right that the rest of us get somehow poses a threat to that right for those of us who already have it.

I need to find a bumper sticker that reads… “Against Gay Marriage?  Don’t Get One!”

Winferall has a good point. Typical club rags don’t show black people too often in their “who’s there” party photos. The drag artists might make it, but ordinary POC - nope. The Advocate’s issue with the infamous “Gay is the new Black” cover has a Holiday Gift photo spread, and the selection is very definitely white male-oriented. Basically, I think that the magazines are aimed at the readers with the most money (statistically speaking). And sad to say, many clubs want to uphold a white image, for the same reason.

As far as coalitions are concerned, I think that the people whose hearts are changed are the people you work with (assuming you are sincere, not bossy, and polite). Forget the clergy - their jobs and average Sunday attendance often ride on avoiding controversy within the congregation - and that translates into attacking outsiders and not the garden variety threats to actual marriages, like the philandering congregants. Given the extreme free enterprise model of black churches (relatively few blacks belong to denominations that have geographically based congregations), I’d expect most clergy to be risk-averse with regard to keeping congregants in the pews. Of course there are always the exceptions like Rev. Carlton Pearson (see newer post) - but very often the congregants change before the pastor changes.

Pam, the math is the math.  Black voters were 10% of the electorate in CA and voted 70-30 for Prop 8, ergo had every Black voter stayed home it would have 50-50 likely passed/been a recount, since Prop 8 won by 4 points (i.e. 10% x (70-30%)=4%).

Whether this cold, mathematical fact justifies a “blame game” against Black voters is a values and judgment call.  My view is that No on Prop 8 did insanely stupid campaigning and that Team Yes knew Black voters were the weak spot due to strong religious and cultural opposition to homosexuality.  Atheism/counter-religious views among Black Americans polls around 1-2% as against more like 20% among whites and Asian-Americans, and I suspect that makes a major chunk of the difference alone.

No on Prop 8 made almost no Black-targeted ads and got outplayed on timing by Team Yes.  Perhaps Team No can also be blamed for weak GOTV among more liberal whites.  But liberal commenter after another has been trying to duck the algebra - not you, but others.

Why would he read that and have his assumptions questioned when it’s far easier just to vilify blacks? This isn’t the first anti-gay marriage initiative to be accepted by the state’s electorate. And those previous efforts passed by larger margins. Also, no one seems to be questioning the exit poll data even though Velvet Revolution has challenged it and The Center for The Study of LA is all but declaring it wrong. Instead of looking at how to build upon this experience to move constructively toward the next challenge, too many people are looking for an easy scapegoat to excuse themselves from the hard work ahead.