I’d hoped that Colleen’s post yesterday would have been the final word on this, but this morning I find The Guardian, of all places, blaming black people for the passage of Proposition 8. Even John Scalzi appears to have given the idea some credence. So let’s look at some numbers, shall we?
According the the Chronicle, 52% of Californians voted for Prop. 8. According to The Guardian, 10% of Californian voters were black, and two thirds of them voted for Prop 8. So how come the passage of the measure is the fault of the 7% of Yes voters that were black, and not of the 45% of Yes voters who were not black?
Now granted, black people turned out in greater numbers this year because of Mr. Obama, but are you going to say that they shouldn’t be allowed to vote because they don’t support the same causes as you do? Isn’t that a bit Rethuglican?
Besides, there is more to it than that.
When analyzing elections we tend to focus on the data given to us by polls, because we have it, but the meaning of poll data isn’t always clear. The pollsters use ethnicity as one of their analysis classes, and because race is a big issue people tend to obsess over it. And yes, there is a correlation between being black, or Hispanic, and voting Yes on 8. But I’m sure that if they had asked the right question then pollsters would have found a stronger correlation between being poor and voting Yes on 8. And of course there is a strong correlation between being poor and being black or Hispanic.
Why are poor people more likely to support 8? Well, there are lots of reasons. To start with they are less likely to have LGBT friends because, let’s face it, if you are queer you’d probably rather not live in an area where gangs are powerful. Also poor people tend to be poorly educated, and are therefore more likely to be taken in by the nonsense peddled by religious fundamentalists. And poor people may be strongly dependent on their local community, which can mean a lot of pressure to conform to social norms imposed by the older generation.
So please, let’s stop all this nonsense about homophobia somehow being a product of the color of your skin. It isn’t even a product of ethnic culture per se, unless you happen to subscribe to some extreme form of identity politics that states that you cannot, for example, be consider Hispanic if you are not a Catholic. Homophobia is a product of ignorance and religious bigotry, and those things are common to all ethnicities. They are also things that can be cured by creating a less racist society.
Hmm. While I don’t support blaming the minority community for the passage of the bill, I think there have historically been some grounds for believing that it is more challenging to be gay and black than it is to be gay and white in our society. In Psychological Perspectives on Lesbian and Gay Male Experiences By Linda Garnets, Douglas C. Kimmel, for instance, they cite a number of authors who wrote (admittedly this was back in the ’80s) of the specific stereotyping of black gay people and indicated black gays received less support from the general gay community and more ostracism from their ethnic communities than whites.
Now, whether this stemmed from an unwelcoming atmosphere in the LGBT community or from things like lack of introduction/integration into the more supportive communities (rather like we continue to fail to integrate more blacks into the SF community despite a lack of racism there), I don’t know. But the strong role definitions in black communities are well-documented, and may be something worth discussing as an opportunity for outreach, rather than argued against in order to defend their communities against accusations (even though those accusations may be worth deflecting in other ways).
Editor’s Note: Typo noted in follow-up comment corrected and follow-up deleted. — Kevin
It certainly is more challenging to be gay and black than gay and Anglo. I can’t vouch for the US but in Europe I can assure you that it is more challenging to be gay and Polish than gay and Anglo. And my apologies for picking on the Poles in particular, but they are the most obvious example due to the strength of Catholicism in their country (and relative poverty compared to, say, Spain or Italy). It isn’t the color of your skin that matters, it is the society you have been brought up in.
You can look on this as an identity politics issue. In just the same way as Female <> liking dolls and wearing dresses, Black/Hispanic/Polish/whatever <> homophobic.
I wonder also how many folks voted for it who may not have particularly thought about it deeply, the way I voted for the ban on Greyhound racing here in Massachusetts but saw the ads about people losing their jobs and was sort of on the fence, but then voted for the ban anyway because I’ve never thought well of it.
A matter of presentation, opportunity, etc.
Definitely cultural.