More on Prop 8

Thank you man

Posted by Menelik | November 6, 2008 11:31 AM

Well, I am gay and I am not black, and I am a big fan of Dan, and I understand where he is coming, but TNC is 100% right on this.

It is fine to point to the obvious problem of homophobia in the black community but I'm also seeing a little bit of scapegoating here. C'mon my fellow gays, support for amendment 8 was in the very, very high 40s both between whites and hispanics. We need to work a little bit harder with anyone. Also, we voted for Obama because he was just too fucking much better than the alternative both for the country and for gays. We were going to vote, for whom, Palin? It is such BS to blackmail black people as if we did them a favor. Remind me of some straight people that I have come out to them, they have said "fine" and then some time later we have had a disagreement they would say "But I accepted you as you are" -Oh, thanks so much!

Posted by Eduardo | November 6, 2008 11:40 AM

"Black folks didn't object to slavery, they objected to being the slaves."

I think this is the crux of the problem. As a Jew, let me speak of my people with wildly sweeping generalities. I think the history of Jewish oppression culminating in the Holocaust minted two kinds of Jews: those that said, "Oppression, like the kind we suffered, is wrong," and "The oppression we suffered is wrong."

Do you become more tribal in the face of oppression, or more universal? Do you vow that you will never let it happen to anyone ever again? Or that it will never happen to you and yours ever again.

The more defensive a people become, the more under siege they feel, the more they become tribal. That's why many Israelis are so defensive/crazy/Likud. Hopefully, with Barack's election, black folk will feel a little less under siege, and will be able to embrace universalism a little more.

Everybody else too. Lord knows we all need more of that.

Posted by Muzz | November 6, 2008 11:42 AM

I'm generally surprised by the lack of quantitative argument from Dan Savage here. In particular, there are close to 10 times as many white Californians as black Californians. Thus, rather than looking at the vote margins in each racial group for the vote on Prop 8, one could ask: how many homophobes are there within each community.

By this standard, I think it's pretty clear that across the nation (and within California) there are more homophobes in the white community than in the black community, because even if the percentage of homophobes in the black community is higher, there are a lot more white people out there. Base rates matter.

Posted by J | November 6, 2008 11:44 AM

As to Eduardo - it is indeed fine to point out the obvious homophobia in the black community. And Dan did just that. What's the problem? To "scapegoat" is to blame a blameless thing in lieu of the actual blameworthy thing. But African-Americans were by far the most ardent supporters of Proposition 8. Are they not blameworthy?

Posted by John | November 6, 2008 11:46 AM

"I think the history of Jewish oppression culminating in the Holocaust minted two kinds of Jews: those that said, "Oppression, like the kind we suffered, is wrong," and "The oppression we suffered is wrong."

@Muzz - I think you hit the nail on the head.
I hope the election of Barack Obama will enable more people of color, who are celebrating this symbolic lifting of oppression, now turn to job of lifting oppression from all of our sisters and brothers.

Posted by CParis | November 6, 2008 11:48 AM

I think Dan should speak to his own community. I've read that 1/2 of voting age gays in CA aren't even registered to vote and that 1/3 of registered gay voters didn't even vote in this election.

Of course it's better not to start throwing blame around at all and start working to change this around.

Posted by Chester | November 6, 2008 11:49 AM

49% of fucking white fucking voters in fucking California????

Whatever problems the black community may have and for whatever reasons, Jesus Fucking Christ!

Now I rightfully feel like a dick for being so complacent and assuming it'd be a relative cakewalk.

Fuck.

Posted by Tom | November 6, 2008 11:51 AM

Thanks for this post. I'm a Hetero Black Woman and voted No on 8. I also know many other Black folk that voted no. I don't deny the homophobia that exists in our community, but generalization is EXTREMELY dangerous. This is going down a really bad road from which there may be no return. I've shutdown myself.

Posted by sdg1844 | November 6, 2008 11:53 AM

Just to be clear, I do care for what happened to us on Tuesday. We lost also in Florida 62-38. To make it more personal to me, when I came to the states a couple of friends of 25 years gave me a room to stay while they and their two girls cramped in the other bedroom for 3 weeks until I found an efficiency to live. They were so generous they never made me felt I was disrupting their lives (which I obviously was). So I called the wife to try to talk her to vote on Amendment 2 (our own Prop 8 but way more vicious) and I asked her: how are you going to vote and she said, very matter-of-factly: "Yes". I then when on auto-pilot: but do you know that straight people in domestic partnership will be strip of their rights too? Then she said: really? Really, I said, and then went on explaining the whole thing. Her answer: Oh, then I am voting "no"

So, there you have it. This is the shit (good and bad) we all are made. We need to learn to live with it and just try to make all of us a little bit better --at least when we have the energy or the predisposition, when we are not in a fuck-you mood.

Posted by Eduardo | November 6, 2008 11:54 AM

Yah, Dan's a stud, but this is a stupid argument. Because voting for a black candidate and voting against a proposition that would deny gay people rights are not comparable. Because it's much easier to diss a group's humanity than an individual's. Because, as TNC has rightly insisted, oppression is not a pissing contest. And because, as Eduardo suggests, success on this front is not getting "only" 53% or 49% of blacks to oppose gay marriage.

Posted by Zak | November 6, 2008 11:55 AM

"African-Americans were by far the most ardent supporters of Proposition 8. Are they not blameworthy?"

Blameworthy as a race? The thing that most gets my hackles up on this is because it blames a *race* for a cultural problem. Yes, there's a malaise in the African-American community about homosexuality, as there is in many communities about many things. But to talk about blaming a race is just one more tribal resentment that helps no one.

Say it's just a mistake of phrasing, but it matters.

Posted by Nato | November 6, 2008 11:57 AM

I agree with the people who point out that blacks weren't going to sway Prop 8

At the same time... I canvassed for Obama with a gay man. He looked past the color of his skin, like so many people out there, to support Obama with his time, energy, etc. etc. I know how facile it is to harp on the fact that he supported a black candidate when blacks didn't support gays. He had his own reasons for supporting Obama, in a way that most blacks didn't really have self-interest for supporting Prop 8. I get that. And yet, it still just doesn't square for me.

I think Ta-Nehisi has it right here, and I think he's very smart to point out that oppression is not a path to enlightenment. But the irony is pretty palpable, and it's something that I hope will change.

Posted by Nathan | November 6, 2008 11:58 AM

I agree with J here. There are WAY more whites in California than there are blacks. If you believe the exit poll, 47% of whites voted for this is way more than 70% of blacks even if turnout was 60% among blacks.

Something needs to be made very clear. If gays think being racist towards blacks is going to shame blacks into voting for gay marriage, they are DEAD wrong. Most blacks will ignore them or laugh at them. A lot of blacks believe their struggle much more significant than the gay struggle. That may be the biggest thing here. It is a civil rights issue and people need to understand that, but a lot people don't think like those of us who support gay marriage. Religion plays a big role in this as well.

The point needs to be made that voting Yes on it meant voting No and voting No on it meant voting Yes. We had the same problem here in Ohio in 2004 and my Mom and I were worried that we may have actually voted for the gay marriage ban. A lot of people just do not focus on politics day in and day out, so they may have been confused. There needed to be more outreach on the issue. We can't just confine ourselves to the white neighborhoods and expect the minorities just to do the right thing. That's not going to happen.

Posted by Rainy | November 6, 2008 12:05 PM

@John,

It is a little bit of stretch to going to put all -or even more of the blame- on them when they are such a tiny part of the electorate and whites and hispanics vote 49% each for Prop 8. If I may say, this margin of error stuff. We might as well gone all crazy on say, "white evangelicals" or probably, I don't know for sure "poor Hispanics" or whatever other group didn't go our way. Here in Florida it was hispanics that voted the more against us. And to try to make comparisons with how (not) racist gays are with how homophobic blacks are make no sense and leads to, well, nowhere.

Posted by Eduardo | November 6, 2008 12:06 PM

In addition to what Nato said, I think that Savage's argument shades into scapegoating because the more we talk about black homophobes (or even worse, "the homophobic blacks," as they're all that) so obssesively, we seem to be letting homophobic whites off the hook, and making blacks solely responsible for this conundrum. That's not cool, and it's certainly not productive, but I've seen too much of it on the "liberal blogosphere" already and I'm glad to Coates calmly and thoughtfully counter it.

Posted by Carl | November 6, 2008 12:06 PM

Could it be that Obama's presidency will bring greater visibility and hence greater responsibility to black Americans? I've been wondering. Today we have evidence that a black man can get a Harvard Law degree and get himself elected Senator and President of the United States. He just has be smart enough, work hard enough, and be good enough. Maybe a little smarter, harder and gooder than white guys (like the current occupant).

You know, I think that blacks have been more oppressed in our culture than whites, but they have also been quite powerful. White kids want to be Michael Jordan. I use as my handle a riff on the name of a black basketball player (and true gentleman to boot).

The question is not whether you've been oppressed, or how bad your oppression has been. The question is what are you going to do about it? Are you gonna just carry that big stone on your back all your life and point to it and say "see what's holding me back!" or are you gonna try and put it down, or split it in half, or get stronger, or build a power suit to help you carry it.

If you keep your eyes on the obstacle, you'll never overcome it.

Posted by Doctor Jay | November 6, 2008 12:09 PM

Prop 8 is eating into my joy right now. I am trying to stay positive, and thank you TNC for this post. Yes, we human beings are imperfect, suffering and oppression do not ennoble. When Obama gave his victory speech, I felt proud, and I did feel the sense of unity with so many different people I knew who supported him. Then I woke up to Prop 8, and we just have a lot of work to do, but we have to do it together.

Posted by mutakhalef | November 6, 2008 12:11 PM

Obama was the first presidential candidate I gave money to, and no against Prop 8 was the first proposition I gave money to. As a white 30 something heterosexual, my girlfriend and most of my friends voted no on prop 8, but when I tried to get them to donate they seemed very blasé about it. I have got a number of friends who are gay and I could just imagine how crushing this would be to them but others didn't seem to get that.

This is a long way of saying I think a lot of people weren't that concerned about the issue and its going to require connecting with them in order for gay rights to move forward. Blaming groups seems counter productive.

Posted by Gully | November 6, 2008 12:13 PM

So lemme get this straight, yet another group is coming up with reasons to be pissed at Black folk? Uhh..wait a second...

Posted by AlexG | November 6, 2008 12:14 PM

"But African-Americans were by far the most ardent supporters of Proposition 8. Are they not blameworthy?"

If we're categorizing ardent support, then the Mormon church that funded this entire fiasco would qualify as the most ardent supporters. You can extrapolate that to the Christian community if you'd like to and that would still be a more honest representation of who was in favor of this measure as opposed to just blacks.

I do think that it is shameful that our people would break in favor of prop 8, but I wonder what the raw numbers of support look like. 50+% of blacks voted for prop 8, but how many people is that? How does that compare to the number of whites, asians, and latinos?

The problem here is that we often forget that minorities are rarely unifed in the struggle. I think the Jews standing with the blacks would be a major exception. The Irish and the Italians, barely removed from late 19th century and early 20th century discrimination, were not ardent supporters of the civil rights movement. Many emale suffragists saw the extension of voting rights to black males before white women as a personal affront. Oppression rarely creates a unified front.

What must be done to keep this crap from happening again is more outreach to the Christians who go to suburban churches. The church is where the support, both financially and electoraly, comes from.

Posted by Sara | November 6, 2008 12:17 PM

I for one, do not agree with the approach that the No on 8 campaign took. I feel that they should have personalized it. Showed specific Californian gay couples discussing why they want to be married. Talking about, playing with, fretting over their children, their medical issues, legal issues with home ownership and inheritance.

For example, my doctor. She's been with her partner for 30 years, I think. They've built a beautiful home together. How much trouble did they have putting their wills together? How much trouble could their families have made for them with regard to hosipital visitation? And so on.

The theme of the campaign was, "it's not fair". And I agree with that statement, but I don't think that persuades people very much.

I think that if people understood what how being gay makes so many things harder, they'd feel a lot less like it was a "lifestyle choice", and a giving in to temptation. Ta-Nehisi likes to talk about seeing the woman at the other end of the bar with a herb. But if you're gay, you can't tell by looking whether someone is a potential partner.

We all have to risk rejection. But if you're gay, you don't just risk rejection but humiliation and an outside chance of physical violence.

Posted by Doctor Jay | November 6, 2008 12:20 PM

female suffragists*

Posted by Sara | November 6, 2008 12:20 PM

I am pretty much in agreement with Ta-N on this.

I would like to add a plea for some understanding for the anger gay folk are experiencing right now though. I'm getting some emails from friends and it's upsetting to hear that people cried on Nov 4 for entirely different reasons than most of us.

To put it this way: having people who should be supporting you betray you is more bitter than having the obvious religious conservatives hold you down. I imagine gay people thinking that the same people who voted for Obama also voted to deny them their rights is a bit of a mindfuck.

It's equivalent to knowing that in the part of Pennsylvania I was canvassing, there were voter suppression tactics coming not from the Republicans, but from local Democratic Party folk. Not just random people being racist, but actual Democrats with some local position instigating voter suppression because they hate Obama. It's the anger at being betrayed by "your own" that makes it feel so bad.

Posted by Breukelyne | November 6, 2008 12:21 PM

Whatever "ennobling" Jews got from oppression... it took a very long time.

But after being thrown out of or escaping from a few dozen countries, after repeated attempts at assimilation on six continents over two millennia that most often ended with surrounding cultures turning on us, after enduring everything we've endured -- we finally caught on that the only way we'll ever be confident of fair treatment is if *everybody* gets fair treatment.

Talmudic scholars had been pushing that view for a thousand years, but it took until the last century for the majority of our community to wake up.

.

Posted by wendy | November 6, 2008 12:23 PM

I'm done pretending that the handful of racist gay white men out there--and they're out there, and I think they're scum--are a bigger problem for African Americans, gay and straight, than the huge numbers of homophobic African Americans are for gay Americans, whatever their color.

I'm curious why Dan began pretending this in the first place. What possible utility does the comparison have? And why just gay men? It reminds me of all that sexism vs. racism jazz in the primaries, as though making social progress were a zero sum game.

Posted by southpaw | November 6, 2008 12:33 PM

I'm gay, yet I'm not that disappointed - actually pleasantly surpised that the vote was so close. Yes, I shouldn't have to negotiate my rights, blah, blah, blah, but the reality is that minorities have to fight the uphill battle. Gay marriage will be instituted - it's only a matter of time - be patient, keep cool and make peace. Blaming black people is ridiculous.

Posted by oyvey | November 6, 2008 12:35 PM

Dan's angry. I'm still sublimating a profound sadness into anger, but even I know that blaming groups of any stripe -- race, class, religion -- like this is what gets us into these messes in the first place.

Blame isn't a bludgeon with which to hit people over the head. That just either kills em off or makes them even less disposed to your perspective. Whatever voting breakdowns may be distilled out of this bitterness should be used as a guide to make inroads and where we need to do the most work, not to give us a target to scream at.

I'll tell you what I am angry about: this is the third major election year that I've been deeply disappointed about, and my guy won!!!! Just when the wheel clicks one notch further away from bigotry nationally, it smacks me hard, here, at home, in one of the last places I expected.

Time to scour the Shire of some bigotry.

P.S. A thank you to one of your posters yesterday (Peter?) who said, "We got this," in reference to the next generation and equal marriage rights. Thank you, man. That, more than anything, lifted me up.

Posted by AG | November 6, 2008 12:40 PM

I think part of Savage's problem is that he fell into the trap of assuming that all "oppressed" minority groups will, or should, stick up for each other. Maybe they should, but the reality is that it's not that simple.

The percentages are upsetting, but the reality is that Prop-Hate didn't pass because a majority of blacks voted for it. It passed because a majority of blacks voted for it AND almost half of whites voted for it AND large percentages of Latinos and Asians voted for it. The No On 8 campaign just didn't move enough people, of any color.

Meanwhile, if Savage wants more blacks to reject homophobia, then maybe he can contribute to the effort by knocking it off with the victim one-upmanship. The effects of racism and those of homophobia aren't the same. I don't agree with dismissing sexual minorities' concerns as "trivial" compared to the problems facing people of color...but Shang is correct: our fight is NOT just like their fight. Blacks are, by definition, a visible minority. LGBT people are, for the most part, an invisible minority. We're born into the same families as the dominant majority. We came into the country in all the same ways that heterosexuals did, and our socioeconomic history looks just like theirs. We need to step very carefully about how we compare the struggle for gay rights to the struggle for racial equality.

I heard from a woman that I know some time ago with some very telling insights into her advocacy work for sexual minorities: the LGBT "community" is not a monolith. On the national scale, most of the agitating is coming from people who live in liberal areas and make good money. They assume they speak for all queers, but their concerns are not the same as those of poor folks in the Bible Belt. Perhaps Savage is also falling into that trap: if you're a healthy, able-bodied adult who lives in a blue state and makes a good living, then you might feel like there's nothing more important than the right to get married. I don't downplay the importance of marriage equality, but a little bit of perspective in our attitude might do our advocacy some good.

Posted by Alyson Miers | November 6, 2008 12:40 PM

opression is opression is opression. don't care who it is.

My prayer, agnostic prayer, is that the CA supreme court will say it's a constitutional amendment, requires a 2/3 vote and through it out.

Your marriage ain't my business. Mine isn't yours. Except if we invite each other to celebrate together. That's the community part. Andrew taught me that.

Posted by zic | November 6, 2008 12:44 PM

I'm in the throes of how to figure out 1. How to stop feeling personally responsible for anything anybody black does anywhere 2. How to combat what seems insurmountable, and 3. What to say to my cousin, her wife, and their daughter.

My joy is tainted.

Posted by Galleymac | November 6, 2008 12:45 PM

I'm with TNC and Tom on this. I come from a supposedly liberal part of CA with a large white majority, and while the Nos carried the county, 45% of the folks here voted Yes. That's simply shameful.

It's easy to try and munge the numbers to fix the blame on somebody else, but in the end, 8 passed because too many people of all stripes voted for it, and whether one group was 55-45 for or 55-45 against seems pretty irrelevant.

Posted by faux facsimile | November 6, 2008 12:49 PM

Southpaw: YES. I think anyone who finds himself starting an argument with "I'm done pretending that..." should stop, count to ten and consider whether he's contributing anything or just venting. If Savage really sees the world that way, like a big scoreboard where you everyone's on a team and you decide who deserves consideration based on how much of what was done by which team, that would be pretty fucked up. Based on his other writing I don't think he does see the world that way, but it was a fucked-up remark.

(And it's awfully close to the kind of rhetoric we see all the damn time from right-wing assholes who are "done pretending" that racism is a bigger problem than crime or whatever - like they tried so very hard to be PC all this time, but then OJ was acquitted and they gave up on their selfless idealism.)

Posted by Hob | November 6, 2008 12:51 PM

More than 50% of Californians voted for prop 8. That's a tangible problem to be solved.

If the margin was really 2% then convincing 3% of California's population that they were wrong to vote for prop 8 is enough to overturn it.

Convincing 3% of California is tangible work that has to be done.

If question about Black people and prop 8 is are Black people who voted for prop 8 a good target to get the 3% needed to overturn the proposition.

I'm Black, male, hetero and agnostic/athiest, and I don't think I can be persuasive right now to a Black person who voted for prop 8. The amount of disgust I have towards, especially, Black church leaders would make mutual understanding an impossible outcome in any discussion I could have with any of them.

It's a feeling. I guess it will pass. But sometimes these religious people make me sick.

Anyway, somebody put up a link to an organization that is working to overturn this. My feel is that it will take 3%, whether Black or not, and then the people who are left I can just ignore.

I'm embarrassed for Black people. I am very very angry at the Black church that is acting exactly the way I'm ashamed to expect it to act. But keeping my eye on the prize, overturning this is going to take 3% of California's population and it is doable and after venting our emotions, we have to start working on it.

Posted by Jack Irons | November 6, 2008 12:51 PM

Hello,

Frequent reader, first time poster here. I live in California (recently moved from the East Coast) and I voted No on Prop 8. I am sorry to see that it did not pass but at the same time and I DO NOT appreciate being scapegoated for this. I don't want to speak for all AAs but I think that there is a perception that homosexuality is a white issue. You have images of high powered lesbians (Ellen, Rosie) and upper west-side gays (fictional Will & Grace) and I do not think that blacks identify with that. I believe that it would be best if both rooms reached out to each other.

I also will say this: in dealing with members of the gay community the white ones whom I've encountered often are extremely ARROGANT. The sentiment that I pick up from them is that "I wouldn't even be dealing with you if I weren't gay". I guess some of them may feel like we (as AAs) owe them our support because we're both opposed parties - we do not. Please know this.

In talking with my black LGBT friends I hear them speak of the racism and the disenfranchisement that they feel from the "mainstream" gay community. Who knows? Maybe non-LGBT AAs picked up on this as well and said to hell with it.

Posted by Terri | November 6, 2008 12:54 PM

Re: Nato's comment.

It was not a mistake of phrasing - that is, it was deliberate. How could it not be?

There many reasons, some good and some not so, why we categorize people into racial groups. We do it to examine whether people having a certain skin color are more likely to be pulled over than others. We do it to show the composition of college student bodies. And we (and by "we" I mean the LA Times) do it to see if there are correlations between voting propositions and racial groups.

The correlation is simple and plain, whether it raises hackles or no. You may want to think on the fact that a relatively small, relatively impotent, and easily attacked group of people just had an important human and legal right voted away. Surely, this is much more hackle-raising.

Posted by John | November 6, 2008 12:56 PM

Were the Jews ennobled by oppression? Uh, no.

I think you could have made that argument about us when we were the plucky little survivors who made the desert bloom. When we took our homeland and made it a hell for the people who'd lived there before us? Precious little nobility.

People are people. I understand Dan's anger. My understanding of the exit poll stats is that a massive number of African-Americans voted yes on Prop 8, for whatever reason (as St Augustine said, only God can say what is in a man's heart). But there is no one source of blame here.

The fight for civil rights is a struggle, and sometimes it's two steps forward and one back. But the overall movement is forward. The key is never ever to give up the fight.

Posted by Karen | November 6, 2008 12:58 PM

I always appreciate the math....

Bit of background: Andrew had a link to a Ruffini piece on the youth vote--just winning them, not even the slight increased turnout, is a big part of Obama's margin. And the comments on the post were illuminating: some practical people talking about how social conservatism lost young people while keeping the base of increasingly old people, and some exchanges along the lines of "Young people are a bunch of wimps; who needs 'em--we'll get em in another 4 years when they've seen something" vs "That's sure to help."

So, voters over 65 backed Prop 8 2 to 1. Voters under 30 opposed Prop 8 2 to 1. Forget the 6% of the population in CA that's black; win over some old people, or give it 5 years and the electorate should have shifted enough to defeat it. (I can't believe they can amend the constitution on a 50%+1 vote anyhow; that court case to insist on the 60 or 65% margin might do it. )

Posted by Deborah | November 6, 2008 12:59 PM

Go to the source, Dan Savage. The problem is homophobia, not the color of the face of the homophobia. Who accepts this sexual prejudice? Who "evanglizes" it? Hmmm, let see...

Posted by Tessa | November 6, 2008 12:59 PM

One thing Obama taught is that elections are about numbers.

Obama came up with a way to turn maximize the enthusiasm, donations and volunteer time available and to direct those resources to 52% of the national popular vote and over 300 electoral votes.

TNC points out that Obama's being Black was not a first order concern. His team was out to get votes on the terrain where it found itself.

I'm emotional right now, but this is not an emotional issue.

We as liberals have to now put together our resources and win next time - changing some African American minds and some minds of all races, either way, one way or another we have to reach over 50% next time.

I'm going to make a contribution to this cause, not a huge one, but that is a productive outlet for what I feel. Being mad is human, but unemotionally doing what has to be done to reach the right number of voters is what is going to overturn this.

Posted by Jack Irons | November 6, 2008 1:09 PM

70-30 pro constitutional discrimination of a minority group. I don't blame African Americans for Prop 8's passage. No, that took millions more votes than they could provide. But I'm sure as hell angry about those numbers. I just don't understand why this particular group is so different in their views than other groups are. This is hostile.

My joy over the Obama victory has been tainted. I was ecstatic on Tuesday night when I was (finally) able to fall asleep. I awoke to the reality that we've elected a black man who's a progressive and a Constitutional scholar who proposes equality, just in a separate institution from the majority.

It's very hard rouse supporters to vote against Prop 8 when you preface your views by stating you don't support same-sex marriage. You know, that kind of statement might make people who see an initiative banning same-sex marriage think that Obama's views align more closely with Yes on 8.

And there we are. Every couple of years left and right gather to argue their disagreements and then unite peacefully in their agreement that gay people are lesser. And black people apparently agree with that sentiment much more strongly than other groups. I just don't know what to do about that.

Posted by gex | November 6, 2008 1:09 PM

I'm going to be an apologist for Dan a little bit and say that I think his anger is directed not at the African American community but at the lack of attention which is being paid to gay rights in comparison to racism in our society as a whole right now. More controversially I suppose, he is implying that because homophobia is more entrenched and openly condoned in our society at this moment than racism we ought to be expending more of our finite energy to its cause. What he is saying to the African American community right now I think is hey, we've had your back, why haven't you had ours?

I do agree it is not helpful to weigh the suffering of one group of people against the other. But I don't think its unhelpful to point out the suffering and the lack of action being taken about it out. Perhaps having been oppressed does not make a person less likely to be an oppressor, but it is certainly the best point of departure for convincing someone to put an end to it. That is, the best way to convince those African Americans who currently oppose gay marriage to come around to the other side is going to be to point out the similarites of their suffering to the suffering of the gay community.

Posted by shantih | November 6, 2008 1:15 PM

I can't speak for all jews. I can't speak for most jews. I can't speak for Israeli jews or Orthodox jews. What I can speak for is Midwestern and East Coast reformed jews, both communities in which I have lived and observed and known. That said, every jew I have met and known from the subset I describe feels a powerful resonance with this poem by German intellectual Martin Niemoller:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

To put this in context, I am furious at the GOP, but want to see Obama reach out to conservatives. I loathe racists, but understand that their hate is a product of ignorance, not evil. I fear the fundamentalist theocratic government of Iran, but know that ordinary Iranians have more in common with ordinary Americans than almost any other arab group in the world.

For me, "never again" doesn't mean "never again shall we stand idly by while millions of jews are murdered", it means "never again shall _I_ stand idly by while the forces of intolerance, ignorance and hate gird their loins for 'revolution'."

They haven't counted my No on 8 vote yet (late mail ballot). I hope it makes the difference.

Posted by Jordan Weber-Flink | November 6, 2008 1:18 PM

I agree with a lot of what's been said. For me, Savage, like most gays and lesbians, is understandably angry and broken-hearted. But it isn't productive to single out one group, whether or not they're disproportionately homophobic. I have been pretty angry at ALL heterosexuals, not just the African-American ones, and again that's because I'm angry. Of course, most of the people who voted AGAINST Prop 8 were straight as well, and I have to keep reminding myself of that.

I'm from Baltimore, where we do have a large African-American gay community (I myself am a gay white man). I have no doubt that GLBT Marylanders will never see same-sex marriage in this state. Still, we as gays and lesbians (and straight allies) need to remember that this fight isn't going to be won in a day. It might go a little faster now, and I am surprised that it only took THIS long for gay marriage to happen in some states.

I think the next step from here - and this has echoed in my head since the election - is to just be more visible to straight people. Another thing I've been thinking constantly is that old saying, that a black man has to work twice as hard for a white man to even give him half as much. I see the same thing with GLBT's today. To get even half the distance towards winning our civil rights, we have to be twice as upright, twice as visible, and twice as righteous as any straight person. So I understand, and feel, Dan Savage's pain and betrayal. Still, I can't agree with what he said, and realize that even more than ever we have to fight but keep a level head. That's tricky but we have to.

Posted by JDinBalt | November 6, 2008 1:23 PM

"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

"When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

"When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

"When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

"When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out."

Posted by Diana | November 6, 2008 1:34 PM

"I think part of Savage's problem is that he fell into the trap of assuming that all "oppressed" minority groups will, or should, stick up for each other. Maybe they should, but the reality is that it's not that simple."

It's hard to see other people fights as your own, especially if standing shoulder to shoulder means taking a risk; and doubly so if the 'minority' in question is a minority you think has chosen to be a minority.

So far as I can tell, I didn't chose to be straight, and I don't reckon that anyone choses to be homosexual either. But I do chose to have sex and I did chose to get married. I chose to do things in bed with my wife that, up until Bowers v. Hardwick were illegal in many states, even for married couples. (I chose to do those things with other women back when those things were illegal.)

I also chose to make and distribute films for which I could face charges in numerous states and municipalities throughout the county, and even at a federal level. (Among other things) I regard the making of these films as an exercise of my civil rights. There are also films I choose not to make and distribute because the risk of the prosecution seems especially high, and I regard that as an imposition on my civil rights.

Do Dan Savage or Andrew Sullivan of any other gay men decrying black homophobia owe me some special consideration? Does the discrimination they suffer mean they have some special obligation to speak out on my behalf? How about blacks, or irish, or jews. Does membership in an "oppressed" minority mean a person has a special obligation to defend me?

I'm pretty sure the answer is "no". I'm pretty sure that the act of standing up for another person's rights is an act of conscience, and that each person must answer as an individually for what the choose to do -- or choose not to do.

"We need to step very carefully about how we compare the struggle for gay rights to the struggle for racial equality."

What I think we need to do is get past equating civil rights with equality. Civil rights encompasses equality and liberty. If we do that, perhaps we can leave behind "victim one-upsmanship" and start working towards a nation that offers liberty and equality to of its all people.

Posted by Tony Comstock | November 6, 2008 1:36 PM

I think that a lot of the people who are surprised about how the AA community voted are forgetting that while we are a very consistent voting block, the consistency and the numbers for a huge swath of black voters is directly tied to the church. (My Aunt, who belongs to the AME church, tried to anoint me with oils before I went to college ... No joke.) I'm saddened, but not surprised by those numbers. I'd even venture to guess that the 'phobe share of the black vote might have been even higher without Obama attracting so many new registrations. These are Evangelicals with better food.

Posted by janine | November 6, 2008 1:43 PM

I don't live in CA, but I have a couple of questions about the outreach done within the black community for No on Prop 8.
1. Did they do any interviews with black radio such as Michael Baisden and/or Tom Joyner?
2. Did they get prominent AA's (both straight and gay) do go into the community?

Just an aside, I'm black and believe in gay marriage as a human issue, but I can't name any prominent black gay activist not even fictional ones. I think the gay community needs to find a way to make this an emotional issue for black people. Civil rights wasn't personal to most white people until they saw the faces of Rosa Parks, MLK, and students being chased with dogs. It may not be right, but I think that's the way human nature works. You have to hit people in their heart.

Posted by fanita | November 6, 2008 1:45 PM

I think anyone who finds himself starting an argument with "I'm done pretending that..." should stop, count to ten and consider whether he's contributing anything or just venting.

I think this is the downside of our blogging culture; our venting becomes public and debatable very quickly.

Posted by Persia | November 6, 2008 1:48 PM

"Civil rights wasn't personal to most white people until they saw the faces of Rosa Parks, MLK, and students being chased with dogs. It may not be right, but I think that's the way human nature works. You have to hit people in their heart."

I Agree 100%

Posted by Terri | November 6, 2008 2:11 PM

interestingly, FiveThirtyEight posts that Obama outperformed Kerry among all voters except the 65+ and gay and lesbian voters (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/obama-outperforms-kerry-among-virtually.html)

...why?

Posted by purexj | November 6, 2008 2:34 PM

Dear TNC--

To answer your question, and speaking as a Jew, no, we are not ennobled by oppression. Not all of us, anyway. See AIPAC, Kristol, Netanyahu, Kahane, etc. They are to me what homophobic black voters are to you.

And since you're a Marvel fan, consider Magneto. There's a Jewish character who survived the holocaust as a child and anti-mutant bigotry as an adult, and it turns him into a genocidal villain in his own right. To my mind, Magneto (who, incidentally, was dreamed up by Jewish writers) is a stand-in for the neocons and the Likudniks, not to mention violent revanchists of any other oppressed group.

Posted by David | November 6, 2008 2:39 PM

"Civil rights wasn't personal to most white people until they saw the faces of Rosa Parks, MLK, and students being chased with dogs. It may not be right, but I think that's the way human nature works. You have to hit people in their heart"

That's fine as a working premise. But how exactly am I supposed to live my private home life in a way that is visible? How do I demonstrate, publicly, that I am punished financially because I cannot marry my partner? The real difference was that African Americans were not allowed to fully participate in public life, and so sitting in a certain seat on the bus could make a statement. I cannot go get a protest marriage.

The biggest difference that I see in the fights for civil rights between blacks and gays is that the general public acknowledges that being black is not a choice.

I fully acknowledge that the road has been harder for black people. Just don't let that fool you into thinking our journey has been shorter. For as long as there have been black people in America, there have been gay people.

Being able to live or pass as being straight has allowed us to avoid the horrors that were inflicted on black people. But that is also precisely what is preventing us from achieving full equality.

Posted by gex | November 6, 2008 2:56 PM

"Go to the source, Dan Savage. The problem is homophobia, not the color of the face of the homophobia. Who accepts this sexual prejudice? Who "evanglizes" it? Hmmm, let see..."

Black preachers, I suppose. You can't try to put how black people voted on this on Pat Robertson.

Posted by Asher | November 6, 2008 3:06 PM

The absolute most infuriating homophobia that I ever encountered was a black woman's. She got up and gave her presentation on what made gays gay. Her research had been started on her own opinion, used religious bigots as sources, and never veered towards science or study. She concluded with the statement that gays were all sexually molested as children.

I was respectfully silent throughout, but I was too furious when it was over to do more than try to indicate she'd offended me, swear, and walk away. I hope she got the F she deeply deserved. I get where Dan's coming from because I've never heard racism that deeply rooted yet commonplace.

But I still regret not trying to educate her. Lost my temper. My bad.

Posted by sharky | November 6, 2008 3:09 PM

@Gex

Exactly what I've been trying (and failing) to make a lucid post about. What are going to have, images of the cops busting in on two gay guys consummating their marriage? I don't see this as winning over the people who vote in favor of Prop 8.

Posted by Tony Comstock | November 6, 2008 3:18 PM

I'm a Black feminist queer woman and I have always been irritated with Savage's lack of carefulness and complexity. I get that he's pissed about 8 passing, I'm pissed about 8 passing, but seriously, we can do better than trying to pass this comment off as some kind of insightful political analysis.

I appreciate your posts today and yesterday, Ta-Nehisi. We do have work to do in the Black community on issues of gender and sexuality, we always have. But let's put this in some historical context. Black folks in the U.S. have a different political trajectory than white folks in the U.S. Without going into a whole lecture, racism has almost always found its most vile and effective means through sexual and reproductive violence and distortions. Consider sexuality, rape, and family under chattel slavery; how lynchings were not just murder, but about sexual disfigurement and rape anxieties; the Eugenics movement to forcibly sterilize Black women and men throughout the 20th century; the vicious Moynihan report; the crazy "welfare queen" debate... Black sexuality has always been a primary target for systematic violence.

So, part of the response has been to double down on a socially conservative view of family and sexuality, perhaps to convince ourselves (I'm talking about Black folks), as well as white folks, that we are "normal" and not deserving of racial violence. This understandable strategy should sound familiar to LGBT folks. That's why we (now I'm talking about queers) often marginalize poorer queers, trans folks, and generally queers that are queerer than your white, middle class/wealthy, monogamous, child-desiring, marriage-dreaming, picket fence, "We're just like you!" queers. (i.e. Savage, Ellen, Rosie, etc.)

There seems to be a hope that if we (now talking about Black folks and queers) can just demonstrate that we are not too scary, that we can stay in line and conform appropriately, then they'll treat us like we are human.

In the meantime, the majority of Black families are not traditionally nuclear families. Look at your own family, Ta-Nehisi, and your and Kenyatta's decision to avoid marriage and a wedding. That's interesting. I think queers can build stronger coalitions if we have a more complex discussion about how this nuclear family shit isn't working for lots of us, particularly Black and Latino families, but also lots of families that include straight white folks. Shit, when Madelyn Dunham died, Sullivan had it quite right when he said that she was Obama's last parent. Obama (and Bill Clinton) came from non-traditional families -- or families that were "queer" in the sense that they were counter-normative. This could be an opportunity.

I really hope this isn't interpreted as "Black folks think that racism is an excuse for their homophobia." That interpretation is, as you might put it, Ta-Nehisi, WEAK SAUCE. The awesome sauce, as it were, would be an analysis that takes history and intersection of these oppressions seriously, and uses that analysis as a way to define coalition strategies. Hopefully, this could create a richer analysis than what Savage (and others) have offered so far: Blacks against queers. Weak. Boring. And not in the least bit productive.

Posted by tghi | November 6, 2008 3:28 PM

I dunno ... I kind of have a lot of sympathy for Dan on this. As non-sensical as it is "blame" a race of people, there is a kernel of truth in wanting to call out the bullshit and demand something different in the future. It doesn't make a lot of sense to demand something from a group of people, but he's got some justifiable rage. The disparity between how blacks and other groups voted on the bill is not deniable, even if we can crunch the numbers and say it wasn't decisive.

But, on the other hand No on 8 was a terrible campaign for the most part. I felt like it was always talking to me and I'm in the tank, always have been. Where were the ads, the door knocking, the outreach, to the great massive middle of people that are uneasy about gay marriage but persuadable?

Posted by Loneoak | November 6, 2008 3:31 PM

I've been waiting and dreading for people to start blaming the Black community as a whole for the passage of Prop. 8 since tracking early exit poll numbers on Tuesday night. You can play the numbers any way you like, and say that Whites are responsible because there are so many more of them, or that Blacks are at faults because they "should" have voted like Whites, or Latin@s, that really isn't the point.

Out of state money flooded this campaign and the airwaves were full of completely deceptive pro-8 advertising as a result. No on 8 didn't do as good a job of framing the issue and getting the message out there. But think about the shift in voting patterns from just eight years ago when Prop. 22 passed with 61% of the vote. Now we're looking at 52% passing Prop. 8, and that number is just going to continue to drop.

The legal case for making this a Constitutional revision rather than an amendment is fascinating, and has a real chance. There's a post up on the CA NOW blog giving breakdown of the legal challenges to the passage of Prop. 8 in California, the background and precedent on which they are based, and why they may be successful in preserving marriage equality.

Posted by Elena Perez | November 6, 2008 3:40 PM

@gex, Tony Comstock

I didn't mean it that way. I was thinking more along the lines of images of happy gay families discussing the issues, not people getting beat up. Some people (not me) need to be emotionally involved in the fight. I'm just thinking out loud. I don't have the answers.

Posted by fanita | November 6, 2008 3:43 PM

But African-Americans were by far the most ardent supporters of Proposition 8. Are they not blameworthy?

_They_ aren't blameworthy because _they_ didn't do anything. 5,376,424 people (so far) voted for proposition 8. Some of them were black. Some of them weren't. Each one of them is _individually_ culpable for this. But that doesn't reflect morally on anyone else.

Do white men, most of whom supported prop 8, attain some merit based on the color of their skin and the fact that enough white women voted against the measure to make the overall white vote end up 51% against? This sort of thinking is absurd!

The only value of exit polls is in terms of stategery and savvy activists are going to want to pour over these things to learn how to run better campaigns in the future. But they have no moral significance because collective guilt is a ridiculous and, in fact, immoral idea.

Posted by dummdumm | November 6, 2008 4:09 PM

Dear TNC,

This is my first time posting here, but I’ve been a faithful (read: obsessive) reader since I heard you on Tell Me More back in early September. I really appreciate the thoughtfulness of your blog entries and the great discussions that occur within the comments. I’ll add my voice to those who have already said that you definitely should keep this going.

Now to my comment. You said the following:

But if you believe black people are not just receptacles for bigotry, not just automatons programmed by centuries of racism, if you believe they consume oxygen like the Irish, that they ingest solid food like the Italians, that they enjoy a good drink like the denizens of Appalachia, that they like to party like gays of any color, that they like to dance like white women, then you understand that no group, anywhere, ever was ennobled by oppression. (The Jews, maybe? No?)

Groups of people who end up on the bad end of history aren't heroic, they aren't better for it, they're just down--and, in most cases, they'd put the victors down if they could. What's the old saying? Black folks didn't object to slavery, they objected to being the slaves. Heh, we don't regret the Middle Passage, we regret the Sahara Desert. We regret not having guns and ships. We regret not being first. And so it is for most of humanity. It's true that individuals sometimes draw wisdom from suffering--but nations tend to be all about the zero-sum.

You seem to be making an argument for an understanding of human nature, which is an idea that, while I haven’t fully rejected it, I’ve become highly skeptical of as I’ve grown older . Understandings of the “natural” are just too deeply embedded in practices of brutal oppression. Beyond this, however, even if using history as our guide/teacher we can see that there has been a tendency for oppressed groups to become oppressors as a function of tribalism, factionalism, or whatever other words there are to describe this, we live in an age now that at least in principle rejects that type of behavior. The underlying principle of western democracy, and particularly this western democracy, is universalism, and more specifically, universal human rights. This universalism, as embodied by the phrase “All men are created equal”, was built into the understanding (an idealized one, yes) of how our country is supposed to operate. Wasn’t pointing out the contradiction between universalism and enslavement one of the signature arguments of the abolitionist movement. Wasn’t pointing out the contradiction between the principle of universalism and the legalized practice of segregation one of the key arguments of the civil rights movement? I think the answer to both questions is yes, and if so, then wouldn’t that seem to mean that all Black people embraced the universal ideal?

I agree with the assessment that it isn’t inherently or necessarily logical for there to be alliances between or among oppressed groups whose cultural experiences, generally speaking, don’t overlap. It is logical though within a culture that has as its ideals an understanding and appreciation of the universal, within a culture that has in its (short) history movements where people have tried to get the country closer and closer to that ideal.

To say that there is little historical precedent for minority groups, oppressed groups to become allies seems like a cop out to me. If you really believe in the ideals of this country, if you were a part of or are a beneficiary of a movement that harnessed the ideals of this country to get it to move forward, then you should know better. It's a matter of principle. Easier said than done, but still.

Posted by lmgregory | November 6, 2008 4:13 PM

Most of this talk is nice but I don't hear many people saying what's important: "blacks" are monolithic. Isn't that a huge part of what we've been trying to accomplish these past hundred years. While communities often hold people with similar views and problems, the very word means a collection of individuals. As such, how do I inherit Dan's or anyone's ire just by the color of my skin? Hell I'm queer, but black, am I one of those "blacks" who hate? Many of the pro-Savage remarks here would seem to say as much.

Now there is only one organized entity in this Prop 8 battle which could receive some blame (though you wouldn't know it listening to Savage's nonsensical rambling) and that's the Mormon Church.

I don't mean to be terse but Savage is venting in a public space and so he should have written with more care.

Posted by Chaz | November 6, 2008 4:50 PM

I am Indian, and similarly, we have homophobes in our community in larger numbers than other groups. All I will say is this: it is noble to stand up for your own group; to stand up for others is divine.

Posted by Annapurna | November 6, 2008 4:50 PM

We can all appreciate that we have different history, a million cultures within cultures. But to me, this issue simply boils down to love and compassion for your neighbor. We absolutely must stand up for each other, it is the only way to move forward in society.

Posted by Annapurna | November 6, 2008 4:56 PM

The populations that voted for Prop 8 and against gay marriage are those populations with the biggest crises in the family in their own communities: African-Americans of a range of socio-economic classes, and working-class and rural whites. The rate of illegitimate birth maps pretty squarely onto the rate of support for Prop 8.

Different varieties of homophobia merit different analyses (as do, of course, different varieties of racism.) In the case of many African-American communities, I think it's clear that there is a crisis of masculinity that is propelling a lot of the homophobia, as well as the, ahem, clinging to religion (or at least religious rhetoric.) Just like rural, Christian whites, the volume of the rhetoric about traditional family values is an attempt to drown out a glaring failure to live them - and so the projection of that failure onto others (gays, atheists, "the elite".)

I'm sure more stuff that what I just wrote is happening. But it's still happening.

Posted by Lemmy Caution | November 6, 2008 4:58 PM

Personally I think the bullshit cuts both ways...

It is wrong to blame prop 8's passage on any group besides ignorant homophobes. Not morally wrong, either, but logically wrong. Being pissed at blacks for it, or saying blacks are hurting the gay community, is seeking to address a straw-man. The color of one's skin is --NEED I REMIND US?-- irrelevant. If all blacks had voted against it but only 20% of whites it still would have passed and no one would be gnashing their teeth talking about how the white community is a problem for gays. No, the talk would be, "damn ignorant bastards did it to us again."

That said, that is some serious bullshit on the part of black homophobes. I mean, come on. The same arguments were literally used against inter-racial marriage. The same "yuck" sentiments were expressed about ~black skin~ IN MANY OF THESE PEOPLE'S LIFETIMES. How could you even kiss a black man/woman? It's gross! That is some seriously ignorant pathetic shit to be that shallow and incapable of putting the shoe on the other foot. Time somebody said it and not just me.

Posted by bakum | November 6, 2008 5:40 PM

"But that's not because I necessarily think black people are the crux of the problem, it's because I'm black and I want us to fucking represent."

I absolutely am not going to blame black people for this fiasco for the simple reason that there are not enough of you in California to matter politically on a practical level. You seem more concerned with a matter of conscience, but for me in my position your consciences are quite beside the point.

"But African-Americans were by far the most ardent supporters of Proposition 8. Are they not blameworthy?"
If we're categorizing ardent support, then the Mormon church that funded this entire fiasco would qualify as the most ardent supporters. "

Bingo. It wasn't the AA community that flooded the state with pro-Prop.8 money. It was the God-damned Mormons who did that.

When it comes to being despised as deviant by mainstream society, you would think that Mormons would remember that people in glass houses can't afford to throw stones.

What is needed is an voter initiative to deny state recognition of any mariage involving a member of the Mormon church. Put the shoe on the other foot. A simple sworn statement on the registration for a marriage license denying membership would be sufficient. Of course the state should have already subpoenaed and checked the membership roles so they can carry out checks, and for whatever other uses may arise. It is time to rescind the tolerance of this kind of activity that decent people have been showing.

Posted by Jim | November 6, 2008 5:42 PM

Are black Californians "blameworthy"? According to their population size and voter turnout, they're, strategically, somewhat blameworthy. Are the 70% of black Californians who voted in favor of prop 8 indicative of a large(r) homophobia problem in that community? Absolutely.

Posted by Gordon | November 6, 2008 6:39 PM

I don't appreciate the generalization, but does have a grain of truth to it. He ought to have been more precise because it's not all of the black community but there is a crazy level of homophobia in my community.

This is purely anecdotal, but I was out last night with a group of five African-Americans, me included. Two gay men were seated at the table next to us and you would have thunk it had been two hood wearing KKK members. I'd never experienced such a strong anti-gay reaction and it shocked me. I'm from California. I went to school and lived in San Francisco before I moved abroad. I'm as socially liberal as they come. I was shocked to be with people who were so offended by someone simply due to their sexual orientation. Their reactions were completely inappropriate.

What happened last night is at the crux of Ta-nehisi's point. We're not anymore noble than any other group of people.

However, I think we ought to strive to keep in mind that discrimination of any sort limits us all. I've seen the debates and the offense some have when the struggle for gay rights is likened to the struggle for racial equality. There are similarities and to deny them is just, well, dishonest.

On a technical note, I voted absentee in California in this election, but my absentee ballot didn't have the local and state propositions on it. It only had the Federal seats that were up for grabs.

Comments (110)