parsing the LA Times

Astrid posted this article. I claimed it is bullshit. Since I am on a roll, I will not demonstrate why this is so.

No-on-8's white bias
The right to marry does nothing to address the problems faced by both black gays and black straights.
By Jasmyne A. Cannick
November 8, 2008
Iam a perfect example of why the fight against Proposition 8, which amends the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, failed to win black support.

I am black. I am a political activist who cares deeply about social justice issues. I am a lesbian. This year, I canvassed the streets of South Los Angeles and Compton, knocking on doors, talking politics to passers-by and working as I never had before to ensure a large voter turnout among African Americans. But even I wasn't inspired to encourage black people to vote against the proposition.

Why? Because I don't see why the right to marry should be a priority for me or other black people. Gay marriage? Please. At a time when blacks are still more likely than whites to be pulled over for no reason, more likely to be unemployed than whites, more likely to live at or below the poverty line, I was too busy trying to get black people registered to vote, period; I wasn't about to focus my attention on what couldn't help but feel like a secondary issue.

What does any of this have to do with marriage? This author is now and will continue to present an image of "rich white gays." Who are these people? I don't know them. And why does she insist on discussing whether this issue should be a "priority" or not? Voting yes or no on a question on a ballot does not require it to be a priority. It just requires recognizing the rights and humanity of other humans. There were twelve propositions on the CA ballot this year. When a person enters a voting booth, he or she has three options for these questions--vote yes, vote no, or do not vote. 52% of Californians who chose to vote, chose to vote yes. 70% of black Californians who chose to vote, chose to vote yes. What does any of this have to do with priorities? Other measures included the folliwing: High speed trains, confinement of chickens, children's hospitals, parental notification for underage abortions, non-violent criminal code, renewable energy, etc. This proposition clearly stated "Eliminates the rights of same-sex couples to marry" (emphasis added). Clearly it was someone's "priority" if they're voting to eliminate rights

The first problem with Proposition 8 was the issue of marriage itself. The white gay community never successfully communicated to blacks why it should matter to us above everything else -- not just to me as a lesbian but to blacks generally. The way I see it, the white gay community is banging its head against the glass ceiling of a room called equality, believing that a breakthrough on marriage will bestow on it parity with heterosexuals. But the right to marry does nothing to address the problems faced by both black gays and black straights. Does someone who is homeless or suffering from HIV but has no healthcare, or newly out of prison and unemployed, really benefit from the right to marry someone of the same sex?

Again, she states--"why it should matter to use above everything else." IT SHOULDN'T matter to you above everything else. But that doesn't mean you have to vote to eliminate other people's rights! To answer her question, YES. That homeless gay man with HIV and addicted to crack would benefit from the right to marry. YES. How would his life had been different if he had been seen as an equal? If he hadn't internalized shame? If his family hadn't told him he was inferior? But, she is presenting an extreme case. Marriage won't solve all of this person's problems. To look less extremely, perhaps the 70 year old black woman wouldn't become infected with HIV because her husband is "on the dl?" Perhaps young black women wouldn't continue to be decimated by HIV if their men were given options, if society recognized them as equal?

Maybe white gays could afford to be singularly focused, raising millions of dollars to fight for the luxury of same-sex marriage. But blacks were walking the streets of the projects and reaching out to small businesses, gang members, convicted felons and the spectrum of an entire community to ensure that we all were able to vote.

Yeah, able to vote to help chickens live better lives. This author is so offensive. What white gays are singularly focused? Does she think there is no "spectrum of an entire community" for gays? Are there no gay convicted felons? Are there no gays addicted to drugs, homeless, owning small businesses, living in projects? She is generalizing and stereotyping beyond belief. And how is marriage a luxury? These straight poor black people of whom she speaks have the right to marry. It is not seen by them as a luxury. It is something that is there, from birth, as an option, or as a dream. Even those convicted felons can get married to the person they love, and what is more important than love?

Second is the issue of civil rights. White gays often wonder aloud why blacks, of all people, won't support their civil rights. There is a real misunderstanding by the white gay community about the term. Proponents of gay marriage fling it around as if it is a one-size-fits-all catchphrase for issues of fairness.

But the black civil rights movement was essentially born out of and driven by the black church; social justice and religion are inextricably intertwined in the black community. To many blacks, civil rights are grounded in Christianity -- not something separate and apart from religion but synonymous with it. To the extent that the issue of gay marriage seemed to be pitted against the church, it was going to be a losing battle in my community.

It's only pitted against the church because the church chooses to oppose it. There are plenty of churches that embrace this concept. Even President elect Obama's undeniably black church supports same sex marriage. The Gospel of John is the Gospel of Love. And for a community so recently removed from Loving v. Virginia, this argument fails to convince. One of the Rev. Dr. King's closets friends in the battle for civil rights was a gay black man, Bayard Rustin.

Then there was the poorly conceived campaign strategy. Opponents of Proposition 8 relied on an outdated civil rights model, engaging the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People to help win black support on the issue of gay marriage. This happened despite the warnings of black lesbians and gays that it wouldn't work. While the NAACP definitely should have been included in the strategy, it shouldn't have been the only group. Putting nearly a quarter of a million dollars into an outdated civil rights group that has very little influence on the black vote -- at least when it comes to gay issues -- will never work.

Likewise, holding the occasional town-hall meeting in Leimert Park -- the one part of the black community where they now feel safe thanks to gentrification -- to tell black people how to vote on something gay isn't effective outreach either.

Ok. Point taken.

There's nothing a white gay person can tell me when it comes to how I as a black lesbian should talk to my community about this issue. If and when I choose to, I know how to say what needs to be said. Many black gays just haven't been convinced that this movement for marriage is about anything more than the white gays who fund it (and who, we often find, are just as racist and clueless when it comes to blacks as they claim blacks are homophobic).

She's even more racist than the side I am presenting. This mythical "white gay" of which she speaks is a total product of her stereotyping.

Some people seem to think that homophobia trumps racism, and that winning the battle for gay marriage will symbolically bring about equality for everyone. That may seem true to white gays, but as a black lesbian, let me tell you: There are still too many inequalities that exist as it relates to my race for that to ever be the case. Ever heard of "driving while black"? Ever looked at the difference between the dropout rates for blacks and for whites? Or test scores? Or wages? Or rates of incarceration?

This is a total non sequitor. What does any of this have to do with the issue at hand? It will not bring about equality for everyone, but it will present gaiety on an equal level as heterosexuality, and it will lead to the solution of many of the problems facing gays. How does driving while black have anything to do with gay marriage? It doesn't. They are totally separate issues. This woman is bitter. The conflation of these two issues indicates to me that she has a major chip on her shoulder and that she cannot bear to see advances for other people. We can work to fix racism and heterosexism, but we needn't conflate the two.

And in the end, black voters in California voted against gay marriage by more than 2 to 1.

Maybe next time around -- because we all know this isn't over -- the gay community can demonstrate the capacity and willingness to change that America demonstrated when it went to the polls on Nov. 4. Black gays are depending on their white counterparts to finally "get it."

Until then, don't expect to make any inroads any time soon in the black community on this issue -- including with this black lesbian.

She hates herself. "Including with this black lesbian?" So did she vote Yes on 8? Sounds like it. Bitter. Bitter. Bitter. Everyone needs a scapegoat (and I fully recognize that in my emotional ranting the other day I was scapegoating). What are the white gays supposed to "get?" That they don't deserve equality because another group has yet to achieve it? And what does she mean that the gay community should "demonstrate the capacity and willingness to change?" Gays voted 73-27% for Obama. Gays are some of the more progressive voters in the electorate. So to what is she referring?

And when she talks about driving while black, does she really think this doesn't exist for the so-called "white gays?" Gays are murdered and beaten every fucking week of the year. On election night in DC a man carrying a rainbow flag was attacked. In your own state, a non-white gay, Lawrence King was brutally murdered in his 8th grade classroom because he was gender non-conformist. Another non-white gay, Michael Sandy, was brutally murdered for being gay. Just because mainstream media has chosen not to tell us about any of these cases since Matthew Shepard ten years ago DOES NOT mean they don't exist. They literally happen every week. So if she thinks the "white gays" have it so good, I think she should open her eyes and stop being so bitter.