Calling Bullshit On All the Political Correctness

[RetiredTrotskyite]

I regularly check Waynebesen.com and the shitstorm over Ms Cannick's remarks and the general phenomenon of a 70% black vote in favour of Prop H8 is still very much alive. I am just SO sick and tired of political correctbess: This is a link to the particular thread:

http://www.waynebesen.com/2008/11/attend-this-event-if-you-live-in-la.html#comments

and here is my reply to the thread comments (subsequent corrections mine):

Chris, I am with you. The political correctness bullshit has long bugged me. The black community seems to be sacrosanct when it comes to criticism. Say ANYTHING critical and you are IMMEDIATELY labeled "racist".

Black culture is to a large extent ANTI-GAY. If any performer used the n-word in a song, he would be taken to task, roundly criticised and rightly so. But let a rapper use the word "faggot" and, hey, "he's just expressing his opinion."

Wake up! The black community is anti-gay. They showed it on November 4th. They voted to take a civil right away. Had the whites voted to take away their civil rights, there would have been riots in California--and I can't say I would have blamed the black community at all. Civil rights are civil rights and not subject to the votes of the electorate.

However, when we just pointed out the overwhelming percentage of the black vote on Prop H8, people began screaming "racist"!

I am sick to death of everything in the way of criticism and analysis being called "racist". It is ridiculous and tiresome.

Racist is when people deny you housing or jobs, or even your right to live because of the colour of your skin. But the black community appears to be so thin-skinned that even a reference to the 70% black vote IN FAVOUR of Prop H8 is being called racist.

I want to know WHY it is perfectly OK for rappers and others to call us "faggots" and other perjoratives and in some cases, call for our extermination, but it is NOT OK for gay people to analyze and criticise a vote that took away our civil right.

People like Ms Cannick need to STFU and do the work of educating the black community.
posted by Blogger Merlyn, at 11/23/2008 11:35 AM

[Karenina]

1. You're a bit late to the party.

The torches are burnt out. WE the PEOPLE are moving on. TOGETHER.

[RetiredTrotskyite]

4. Let's See What You Say

the next time our civil rights are voted down, Karenina.

[Zuiderelle]

5. Her civil rights were voted down also, jerk.

And continuing this kind of crap here serves NO purpose except to be disruptive and divisive. I think that your intention is suspect.

[GodlessBiker]

39. Agreed. It's intent is to divide our community here.

[mitchtv]

10. Moving on? I hope you are right

I will believe it when I see it. My POV on strates is "you are my enemy, until proven otherwise" White , Asian, Latino, or black. Mormons have a special position on the enemies list, number 1.To mee it seems that strates of whatever stripe are all to eager to warm up that back burner.

[Karenina]

77. See post #58.

[Zuiderelle]

2. I agree with Karenina. Please don't post this vile divisive shit here.

[RetiredTrotskyite]

3. Whatever

[Skeeve]

6. How lucky we are...

...that you two are here to tell everyone how we should feel about this topic.

Karenina said: "You're a bit late to the party. The torches are burnt out. WE the PEOPLE are moving on. TOGETHER."

Apparently we're not all together. YOU may be moving on, but some of us still want some answers. Forgetting the past is what leads it to repeat itself. Please don't speak for all of us when spouting this rhetoric.

PelosiFan said: "Her civil rights were voted down also, jerk. And continuing this kind of crap here serves NO purpose except to be disruptive and divisive. I think that your intention is suspect."

"I agree with Karenina. Please don't post this vile divisive shit here."

You should both feel warm and fuzzy inside, knowing that you've protected us from such "vile" opinion.

Name calling, suspicions of an ulterior motive and dismissing the topic out of hand.

Didja get goosebumps when you saw your posts?

RetiredTrotskyite: I felt some of the same anger as you after reading those numbers. But I wasn't surprised by them much. But, IMO (see what I did there you other two? I made it plain my opinion was following and I wasn't speaking for the entire gay community), it's not a "black thing" and by placing the onus on that community, you're doing a disservice to them. The only blame to place in this instance is the bigoted religions who find us so repulsive. Speaking off the top of my head and with no citations to back it up(see, I did it again), I would guess that religions of the black community, christianity and islam being foremost, had more to do with their vote on Prop 8 than anything else.

And, FWIW, I don't feel you should just "shut up and move on", if this issue bothers you and you don't feel you've gotten the answers you're looking for, please keep asking. Ignore those that feel they have some type of moral authority to silence you.

*edited for minor spelling errors

[Zuiderelle]

7. How lucky we are to have two such new members sowing discord in the GLBT forum.

Dredging up what's already been discussed to death here, in a combative manner by blanketly calling all Blacks racist, instead of sincerely approaching the issue of why certain groups of people might have voted in a majority against our rights (based upon one exit poll) and what we can do to address it, is divisive and, frankly, racist.

Edit since you've been here since 2003... why would you choose this thread to make your 8th post?

[David Zephyr]

150. I agree.

Thanks.

[NMMNG]

8. Homophobic, yes

But the root of the overwhelming majority of it is "deeply held religious beliefs" no matter what the skin color. We don't need to be lashing out at people over their skin color. We need to be letting others know that institutionalized discrimination--even that which is under the guise of religious beliefs--is no longer acceptable. Knocking religion off it's pillar of untouchability is a necessary component of that process. No more should people be able to use their religion as both a weapon against others and a shield for themselves against criticism and question about their actions.

The KKK can exist and say whatever hateful bile they want, but their members cannot infringe on the legal rights of non-whites. The same should go for us. People should be able to think and say what they want (so long as it's not advocating harm) but we should be given equal rights and others will have to act accordingly. Until everyone gets that we'll be nowhere.

[RetiredTrotskyite]

9. I Agree, Buffy...

We need to work to knock religion off its pedestal. I have no problem with people practicing whatever religion they espouse. The problem arises when they try to force those beliefs down the throats of others. Homophobes can certainly believe what they wish and ay what they want, short of advocating harm, but they should not be allowed to infringe on our rights. Civil rights are civil rights and they should be for all.

[Karenina]

11. The elephant shit in the room is

That the court sanctioned rights of a minority are NEVER to be offered up on the chopping block to a simple majority vote. Punkt. Feierabend.
Let's establish that principle FIRST, then tackle what continually gets "lost" in discriminatory translation.

[FreeState]

12. You know if only 1% more of white voters voted no it wouldn't have passed either?

Its easy to make scape goats out of statistics. In reality it passed because the No On 8 side did not do a good enough job educating voters. Everyone who voted yes is to blame - it does not matter what religion or skin color they have - they are the ones to blame - all of them.

(Edit to add its probably closer to 3% of whites that would have needed to vote no - but either way you should be able to see my point)

[Zuiderelle]

13. Hear hear.

We don't need to blame African Americans who make up only 15% of our population for that. Makes more sense to blame white males for keeping Bush in office so long. THAT majority actually made a significant impact. Even if a majority of African Americans voted for it, it was white Americans who made it pass, with their votes and with their enormous gobs of money poured into California from all over this bigoted country.

As another poster said, we need to confront the REAL problem here. Our rights should never be decided by a majority vote, period. Makes no difference to me in the end who thinks I suck, as long as they don't get to decide what rights I deserve.

[keepCAblue]

14. The 70%/75% numbers have been debunked...

I myself went through LA county's precinct numbers and found that, even in the communities/precincts with the highest black percentage of population, I could find none that voted in the 70-75% percentile. The numbers averaged around 58% "yes" on prop 8. Still high, but nowhere near as high as what the press (based on CNN's polling results) was continuously reporting, and which was deliberately echoed by leaders of the Mormon church and Focus on the Family's, Dobson.

In looking through LA county's voting results data, I did however find that the precincts/communities with the highest (greater than 60%) "yes" votes for prop 8 tended to be the wealthier, whiter precincts (i.e., those most likely to vote republican).

It's disturbing that protectmarriage.com paid a polling/survey company, Lawrence Research, hundreds of thousands of dollars to conduct surveys and polls and that this same company was, in turn, a large CONTRIBUTOR to protectmarriage.com. Conflict of interest? I'd say so. I sure would like to know what company CNN used to perform the now-infamous CNN poll that came up with the 70-75% numbers for black voters. If it was Lawrence Research, that'd be a pretty good reason to charge both Lawrence Research and protectmarriage.com with conspiracy to ignite culture/race wars.

[dsc]

16. I don't know about LA county

but in SF the districts that voted for were either majority Asian (Chinatown) or majority black. Both voted at around 62%. Not 70 but still quite high.

[Phredicles]

29. And even if they weren't debunked, a great many African-Americans still

voted NO on h8 any way you slice it. It's not like we're talking about a monolithic community here. Pointing fingers at "the blacks" is ridiculously, needlessly divisive.

[mrbarber]

15. Here here.

Well said.

In response to the Original OP.

Stop treating the black community like there some kind of kids. There big boys and girls, they can handle some criticism directed there way.

[Zuiderelle]

17. So, today, I've read from you an insult to fat people, disregard for teen suicide, and now this.

You're on quite a roll.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=4518076#4518274

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3613178&mesg_id=3613237

[mrbarber]

19. Oh, it's you again.

Still making baseless attacks, are we?

I never insulted anyone who was overweight. Please provide a quote where I did.

I also never disregard teen suicide, merely stated my opinion (must really rankle the thought police in you, huh?) that some teenager who turned his suicide into a sideshow so that his family and friends would have to suffer through it as being selfish.

[Zuiderelle]

20. I didn't make any attack, I simply linked to your posts. They contain the quotes you seek.

One would think others' responses to you in both those threads would convince you that what you posted was insensitive.

[mrbarber]

21. Maybe you didn't understand, I'll try again.

Please provide the quote where I insulted someone who was overweight. I wait with bated breath.

As for being "insensitive", well I guess that's a matter of opinion, isn't it? Just because a few people might disagree with what I had to say doesn't mean that your claims are anymore valid. Or are we going with the might is right idea? Because following that logic, if the majority feels a certain way, it must mean it's in the right, correct? Your hypocrisy is showing.

[Zuiderelle]

23. The insult is in the insensitivity.

Just as it is from you here in this thread. And "if the majority feels a certain way, it must mean it's in the right, correct? Your hypocrisy is showing" yeah, right, that's what I was saying. :eyes:

It's cute how you insist that I point out your insult (which I did, since your insensitivity was insulting), and then try to twist my meaning about people finding your post offensive, when you don't even know that it's "Hear Hear" not "Here Here" unless you were waving your hand for the teacher to recognize you.

[mrbarber]

25. So don't actually have a direct quote than so your going to keep going with that "insenstive"

Nonsense. Read you loud and clear.

Oh, and ad hominems attacks over typo's really help your cause.

[yardwork]

52. You are out of line and trying to stir up trouble. Do it somewhere else.

[Jamastiene]

18. I don't care what color someone is.

If they voted to take my rights away...or more accurately, my chance at rights down the road, I have a distinct problem with them.

Even if the alien "grays" came down out of the sky, registered to vote in CA and voted against me, I'd have a bone to pick with them too...and I'm absolutely obsessed with aliens.

The point is: it wasn't their skin color that was the problem. The problem was whether or not they pushed a lever, pulled a lever, filled in the wrong damn oval, or punched some archaic card to vote against me.

It's the action of the person, "the content of their" questionable homophobic "character," that I have the beef with and that knows no color whatsoever.

The race shit has been done to death. We've discussed it until we are all blue in the face. The stupid CNN poll was rigged. I don't care what anybody says. Yes, there are homophobic black people, but there are also homophobic every other color. We move on united or we don't go anywhere at all.

[Eryemil]

22. Yes. Blacks voted overwhelmingly against us

It's not just a few percents folks. Disregard the fact that they are a small enough minority. The people that keep trying to bring that up are trying to cloud the issue.
Every other group was so much more evenly divided that it is ridiculous. Even Hispanics, who everyone agrees tend to be pretty homophobic (I am Hispanic) didn't come even close.

There is a problem. Those numbers are disgusting and inexcusable.

[Zuiderelle]

24. How many assholes are going to post this same shit?

Astounding really. The poll was DEBUNKED. And it doesn't matter what color they were even if it were true. Blacks are not the ones that pushed the number over the top. Blacks were not the ones that poured millions of dollars into the Yes on 8 campaign of lies and disinformation. WHITE HETEROSEXUALS are the ones that voted against our rights and contributed to our inequality in much more huge numbers than blacks. We need to take this to the courts and refuse to allow our equality to ever be voted on again, no matter WHO is doing the voting.

[mrbarber]

26. That's right everyone....

Your an "asshole" if you dare post something that Pelosifan doesn't agree with.

Well, close minded people come in all colors and orientations, I guess.

[Zuiderelle]

27. LOL! Yes, we should all be more open-minded to insensitive jerks

Toughen up your skin. If you're an ass, and you don't like being called on it, try not posting.

[mrbarber]

28. Kettle, meet pot.

[Chovexani]

30. As many trolls as it will take to drive away every queer PoC apparently

[dsc]

31. the returns are in now

and looking at the map even people saying the poll was crap have to admit that the black areas averaged in the 60% for issue 8. The poll was probably a bit off, but it wasn't all that far off. The real numbers, from returns, appear to be closer to the 70% mark than to 50%.

[Zuiderelle]

32. And what's the point? Even if the numbers were true, it wasn't a majority of a minority that did it

to us. What possible purpose does it serve to fan flames of division HERE by saying that the Black community is anti-gay? When the REAL issue is that our rights should not be up for a vote by ANYONE.

When Bush was elected twice, I didn't see everyone trashing all MALES because THEY got him elected, even though THEY DID. Females weren't responsible. We voted a majority against him (in 2004 women voted 51% for Kerry, 48% for Bush, while Males were 44% for Kerry and 55% for Bush).

If men hadn't voted in the last election, we wouldn't have had Bush and the last 4 years of hell we've been through.

Now, conversely, even if say 60% of African Americans voted for Prop 8, it STILL would have passed if no African Americans had voted at all.

This is divisive shit that serves no purpose at all. Instead of blaming blacks for how they might have voted, we need to focus ALL our blame on the ones who poured money into the campaign. They are the ones that lied to voters and convinced many of them that voting for Prop 8 was the right thing to do.

[dsc]

66. It isn't about blame

it is about figuring out we have a huge problem that needs fixed. We ignored blacks in our ad campaign and look what happened. Whether they were the whole margin (very unlikely) or simply a large protion of it (quite likely) we won't ever win if we continue to have that kind of margin against us before we even start. We wrote off the population in the campaign and paid for it dearly. Singing Kumbaya and pretending that blacks didn't vote for issue 8 in droves is asking for a loss in 2010, 2012 or whenever this next comes up.

[Zuiderelle]

70. I don't even care at this point if we "win"... voting away rights should be illegal.

That's what we need to FIGHT for now. I have no interest in trying to convince religious people who don't respect us to vote for us, no matter what color they are. And I'm tired of wasting money trying to figure out who we should target in advertisements. Advertisements! Ads to convince people that we deserve what our constitution guarantees us.

We need to fight this in courts now. What a waste of time and money the No on 8 campaign was, and what a futile effort. This shouldn't have even been ALLOWED on the ballot in California or anywhere. We should direct our money and efforts now on legal cases and forget trying to appeal to anyone to try to win votes. Our constitution already tells us what is right.

I was also initially surprised by the exit poll, but I quickly saw how dwelling on it, whether true or not, is a VERY destructive tactic. I'm also surprised that it showed a majority of Asians, and I'm surprised that it showed as large a percentage of white women as it did, I expected more to be on our side.

I maintain that it's a BIG distraction to focus on how the black community cast their votes, when it was not THEIR votes that made the final result.

[noiretextatique]

73. thanks, pelosifan

it is a destructive tactic and people need to stop using it against their allies. as somone who is black, gay and who voted NO on 8, ai am sick to death of hearing about this.

[dsc]

74. I think we won a majority of Asians

but that is beside the point. I would love for the issues not to be voted on, but sadly they will be for the forseeable future. Thus we need to find out where we fell short, why we fell short with them, and fix the problem. I would love the California Supremes to save us here, but the chances are slim to none that they will.

[Zuiderelle]

79. Yes, that is beside the point. As is blaming the black community.

As I've said repeatedly, we should focus our blame on the ones who FUNDED the Yes on 8 campaign and we should devote our money and energy to fighting battles in COURT now.

I actually feel very positive about the potential of this being justly served in the courts. Being angry at individual groups of people will do NOTHING for us. Being angry at our government and those who pressured the votes will do something.

Why would you so negatively say that our rights will continue to be voted on for the foreseeable future? Because we roll over and blame the wrong people and do nothing the fuck about it.

Stop blaming the black community. Just fucking stop it.

[dsc]

85. what part of it isn't about blame is unclear

what part of did they provide the whole margin (very unlikely)? is unclear. I don't know a clearer way to say it. It isn't my fault you evidently can't or won't read my clearly typed words. The simple fact is that under any reasonably forseable senario for the next 4 or more years we will be having these rights voted upon in virtually every state in the union. If we are very lucky the feds might give us some rights but that is the best we will do their for several years.

[Zuiderelle]

87. The OP is definitely about blame, and it seems you are agreeing with the OP.

[dsc]

95. Uh try reading

I didn't respond to the OP. I did respond to the numbers. I am sick of the likes of you repeatedly lying about what is said and then blaming us for saying what we didn't say.

[Zuiderelle]

96. Lovely.

[dsc]

103. Oh I forgot

it is perfectly OK to lie about what gay posters say to make them look racist. I am so sorry for not remembering the rules.

[noiretextatique]

34. unless people just want to be pissed offf at black people

and it seems that some do, age was the demographic that made the difference in Prop H8's passage.
i am not referring to you, btw.

'At the end of the day, Prop 8's passage was more a generational matter than a racial one. If nobody over the age of 65 had voted, Prop 8 would have failed by a point or two. It appears that the generational splits may be larger within minority communities than among whites, although the data on this is sketchy."

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

[Karenina]

37. It points again to the split, along racial lines, of the GLBT community.

OURS were ignored in the S.C. primary flap. Remember the bone thrown to that white gay pastor? :rofl: The ACLU made a lovely ad... OOPS forgot to include ANY couples of colour! Great shots of the kids, though!

Those who have an ALREADY ESTABLISHED predilection to rip the Black COMMUNITY-AT-LARGE have been handed their Holy Grail by the "Christian" RW media's machine's "divide and conquer strategy." I say let them masturbate to it until they collapse in a heap. The rest of us have more important work to do than listening to their BLACK IS BAD orgasmic rages.

[noiretextatique]

38. you are so right

:rofl: black is bad orgasmic rages :rofl:
as a friend here mentioned, it's probably a good time to examine how race is used to divide. it may also be a good time to actually start paying attention to african-american culture vs. projecting expectations onto it. and of course, as i am sure the No and Prop 8 campaign has learned, if you don't want gay rights to be perceived as a "white" issue, perhaps you should use some people of color in your ads :shrug:

[Karenina]

43. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! SUPERB!!!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[noiretextatique]

40. here's a split that deserves some attention

The Ku Klux Klan is emerging from decades of disorganization and obscurity, and the turnaround is acutely evident -- more than 200 hate-related incidents have been reported since the Nov. 4 election.

Reporting from Bogalusa, La. - Barely three weeks since America elected its first black president, noose hangings, racist graffiti and death threats have struck dozens of towns across the country.

More than 200 such incidents -- including cross burnings, assassination betting pools and effigies of President-elect Barack Obama -- have been reported, according to law enforcement authorities and the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate groups.

Racist websites have been boasting that their servers have been crashing because of an exponential increase in traffic.

And America's most potent symbol of racial hatred, the Ku Klux Klan, is reasserting itself in a spate of recent violence, after decades of disorganization and obscurity.

...

"We've seen everything from cross burnings on lawns of interracial couples to effigies of Obama hanging from nooses to unpleasant exchanges in schoolyards," said Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, based in Montgomery, Ala. "I think we're in a worrying situation right now, a perfect storm of conditions coming together that could easily favor the continued growth of these groups."


Read more: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-kl...

[Karenina]

44. Same shit. Different day...

[noiretextatique]

45. we have overcome

that seems to be the belief that angers some. however, that preception needs some examination given the forces aligning against us. i've talked to several black GLBT who voted against Prop 8, but said other issues were more pressing in their lives, economic concerns being #1.

[Karenina]

47. We have NOT overcome so long as

-ISMS cause people to vote AGAINST their own interests.
-The separation of Church and State is at risk.
-MONEY is considered "free speech."
-The M$M is controlled by vested interests.

I could go on and on as you well know... ;-)

[yardwork]

54. I can understand people having more pressing concerns, but it takes no more time to vote No

than it takes to vote Yes.

The problem isn't lack of time and money. The problem is the religious right. They tell their congregations that they'll go to hell if they don't vote to discriminate against gay people. The Mormons - who are overwhelmingly white - organized the Prop 8 campaign in California. The Catholics and many fundamentalist churches - white and black - helped.

We don't hear much about the other three states that passed anti-gay discrimination this past election day. They are Florida, Arkansas, and Arizona.

We don't hear much about the forty states total that have passed discriminatory laws and constitutional amendments against gay people over the past ten years. None of these initiatives arose in any black community. They were all organized and funded by majority white groups, notably fundamentalists and Catholics and now Mormons. I know this.

I also know that the excuse "this isn't a priority for me" doesn't make sense, because it doesn't take any more time to vote No than it took to vote Yes.

[Karenina]

58. Stand By Me

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A_ma2h0idk

We Can Work It Out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ij6nBQfQoo

[yardwork]

149. Can we work it out? This post still stands. Only one DUer disagrees with it, apparently.

This post has been sitting on DU since November 8, and only one poster has seen fit to disagree with it. Apparently it is just fine with everyone else who read it and posted in the thread.

How do you think it makes me feel?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=258&topic_id=4822&mesg_id=4849

Most of DU's white GLBT people have "outed" themselves as stone cold, dead eyed racists

Sorry to be so harsh, but that's what has happened. Voting to bring back slavery? Yeah, I've read that one. Another one posted something to the effect that "blacks are now my enemies" -- not California blacks who voted yes, but all blacks. The general thrust of the comments are that blacks are stupid, brain dead, hyper religions zombies being led around by homophobic bigot pastors -- even though no one knows exactly what was going through the voters minds when they voted as they did.

When white people begin making stuff up about black people out of thin air and stating it as unassailable fact, there is no other explanation.

All this because in one prop vote in one state, a higher than expected percentage of blacks voted -- not to "kill" GLBT people, not to "destroy" them, but to maintain a verbal distinction between marriage and civil unions.

If they were not a self identified "oppressed" group, they would have all been tombstoned by now, because their rhetoric frankly would embarrass FreeRepublic and the Ku Klux Klan. Seriously, as much cleverly worded racism as you see on FreeRepublic, do you think anyone there would get away with asking for a vote to bring back slavery or saying "blacks are my enemies"? No, they could not get away with it over there. But they can get away with it on DU.

I think a lot of people have repressed anger at Obama's election and are projecting that anger in other ways.

[noiretextatique]

68. the people who voted NO said it was not a priority for them

so it's not an excuse: it's a reality. the only gay person i know who voted YES on 8 is a religious lunatic, so i agree with you on the religion issue.

[yardwork]

83. The religious right is the driver of this.

I've never met a homophobe who wasn't influenced by religious teaching. Either they were raised in a fundamentalist church or they joined one as an adult or both.

I have never met a single person who didn't like gay people who wasn't influenced by right-wing religious ideology. Nobody else cares.

[noiretextatique]

92. i agree 100%

it's THE issue that keeps getting masked by race.

[yardwork]

106. Well, it seems to be talked about quite a bit so I don't know that it's being masked.

The exit poll upset a lot of people. I realize that it was a very small sample size and probably unreliable. Still, it's not right to accuse people of racism (and I'm not saying that you are doing this) for simply asking questions.

I strongly disagree with lumping people together on the basis of this or that characteristic. It's obviously wrong to accuse "black people" of anything just as it is wrong to accuse "gay people" or "white gay people" of anything.

But it's not wrong to look at data - while accepting the datas limitations and flaws - and ask questions about it and discuss it.

My field is public health. Many African American health educators have expressed concern for years about the lack of honesty about sexual issues in some African American communities, notably those of some African American churches. Please note that I am saying some, not all. The rate of increase in HIV among married, heterosexual African American women is very high. Books have been written about men living on the down low. These are sensitive issues. These are difficult, complex issues. These issues are easily exploited by racists. I know that. Broad brush generalizations are wrong, wrong, wrong.

But the accusations being thrown around DU since the election that all white gay people are racist is equally wrong. I'm not saying that you have said this - I haven't seen a single post in which you said this. Unfortunately, it has been said.

[noiretextatique]

108. i haven't seen many unfair accusations of racism here

but i haven't been here enough to comment. i have seen a lot of racist crap here and elsewhere regarding prop 8...yep, racist. i don't think it's necessarily posted by gay people...some of it was just flamebait from trolls. the AIDS issue is something that Cleo Manago addressed in the article I posted in this thread. i'd love to know what you think of it.

[yardwork]

123. I can't find the article.

[yardwork]

148. This accusation of racism is still posted. Thank you for commenting on it.

But it's still there, and so are a number of other similar comments in that and other threads:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=258&topic_id=4822&mesg_id=4849

Most of DU's white GLBT people have "outed" themselves as stone cold, dead eyed racists

Sorry to be so harsh, but that's what has happened. Voting to bring back slavery? Yeah, I've read that one. Another one posted something to the effect that "blacks are now my enemies" -- not California blacks who voted yes, but all blacks. The general thrust of the comments are that blacks are stupid, brain dead, hyper religions zombies being led around by homophobic bigot pastors -- even though no one knows exactly what was going through the voters minds when they voted as they did.

When white people begin making stuff up about black people out of thin air and stating it as unassailable fact, there is no other explanation.

All this because in one prop vote in one state, a higher than expected percentage of blacks voted -- not to "kill" GLBT people, not to "destroy" them, but to maintain a verbal distinction between marriage and civil unions.

If they were not a self identified "oppressed" group, they would have all been tombstoned by now, because their rhetoric frankly would embarrass FreeRepublic and the Ku Klux Klan. Seriously, as much cleverly worded racism as you see on FreeRepublic, do you think anyone there would get away with asking for a vote to bring back slavery or saying "blacks are my enemies"? No, they could not get away with it over there. But they can get away with it on DU.

I think a lot of people have repressed anger at Obama's election and are projecting that anger in other ways.

[mondo joe]

121. My problem with that: People diverge from their religion when they *want* to.

I'm confident there are many people who voted for Prop 8 and would cite their religious beliefs to explain why, who also:

* Have extramarital sex;
* Are divorced or would have no moral problem with divorce;
* Have had abortions or are pro-choice.

I think religion is the excuse for anti-gay bigotry - but it is still a choice the bigot makes.

[yardwork]

122. I agree. A number of "abortion voters" decided to vote Democratic this time.

The stock market dive seems to have greatly influenced their previously unalterable "moral" stance.

In any case, most of the same people who cite a few biblical passages to justify discrimination toward gay people ignore all the other directives in the same part of the Bible, not to mention all of Jesus's directives.

I recently saw an anti-gay message on the signboard of a barbecue place.

[bluedawg12]

124. Not too many groups can voice open bigotry and be tolerated

as anti-gay bigots these days. It is simply mind boggling.

[noiretextatique]

131. sacred hatred

is what i call it, and yes, it is mind-boggling.

[bluedawg12]

147. I call it the last acceptable form of "open bigotry"

why should it be acceptable for anyone to post openly biogted anti-gay signs in their public establishment and not fear the consequences of societal scorn?

Not saying anything about free speech here, I am talking about persistent, blatant, open anti-gay bigoted signs exposing another human being who happens to be gay to that sh*t? For what? For walking into someones hell hole for food?

Where is the outrage?

It's not sacred. It's just ugly. But this has been said before and before and before, that if we substituted any other minority and replaced the gay slur there would be outrage.

Guess what, gays are fed up with this assualt on our humanity.

[noiretextatique]

129. there were several issues with Prop 8

some people who would support civil unions do not support marriage. that's obama's position.

people were confused by what NO and YES meant, my mother being one of them. i told her to vote NO.

as to the issue of religion and choice, i agree with you. however, i don't think deeply religous people really *own* that they are making choices to hate gay people. i call it sacred hatred...a hatred that is deemed as sacred and justifiable because it is based on religious beliefs or the bible. here's a really sickening example: i know a black lesbian who voted yes on 8 because of her religious beliefs.

for years now, i've been inviting people to come to the religious science church i attend that teaches a very basic yet powerful philosophy: we are all expressions of one loving spirit, and any thoughts or beliefs counter to that basic truth are false.

i haven't been as diligent in inviting people of late, but given recent developments, i plan to start doing that again.

[yardwork]

133. Thank you. The problem of anti-gay bigotry is much more pervasive than Prop 8.

In Florida, 63% of voters made it unconstitutional for gay people to have civil unions OR marriages. Texas goes even further - it is unconstitutional for gay people in Texas to even draw up papers making their partner their heir. So don't tell me that all people care about is protecting the word 'marriage.'

In Arkansas, voters in a previous election had already made marriage or unions illegal for gay people. This time they made it illegal for any single people to ever adopt children. Since all gay people in Arkansas are now permanently "single," this effectively prevents any gay person from ever adopting a child.

My state, North Carolina, is the only state in the entire southeast that hasn't already passed a constitutional amendment making gay marriages OR unions illegal. The law in NC already defines marriage as "one man and one woman" and gay unions are not allowed here either, so it's a moot point.

People focus on Proposition 8 and say, "Oh well, some people were confused about the wording or they just want to protect the word 'marriage' and anyway it will be overturned" without realizing how bad things are for gay people all over the country. Civil unions, which don't confer the same rights as marriage, are outlawed in many states anyway. Civil unions are not even close to equal and illegal in most places anyway.

[noiretextatique]

136. i don't discount how bad it is for all over the country

but the post i responded to referred to Prop 8, i mentioned the issues that affected people here, including confusion about how to vote, and support for civil unions.

[yardwork]

139. Do you think that voters in California are significantly different from voters in other states?

From where I sit, I see a nation that is filled with people who casually go to the polls and vote away my rights, and when they are asked why they did so, they get mad at me for (1) being gay, (2) demanding "special rights," and (3) comparing myself to anyone else who ever wanted rights.

It's very discouraging and I'm beginning to get very angry about the excuses.

[noiretextatique]

141. i am not making excuses

i am telling you what people told me about why they made the choices they did. i think it's important to hear that.
i understand your anger, but i doubt it will change any of the people who do not believe you deserve any rights. i don't see anything changing them except their own personal epiphanies.

on the other hand, the courts can provide us protection against them, and that's what has to happen. it did happen in florida the other day, and hopefully it will happen in california again.

[EFerrari]

59. Check out this gallery of a demonstration in Alameda.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcwooten/sets/72157609134186546

Alameda County has a bigger black population than most of the state. CA = 7%, Alameda Co. = 14%. :shrug:

[EFerrari]

48. Then explain why Alameda County with its big for CA 14% black pop

voted H8 DOWN by a big margin?

Explain how with a much bigger black turnout this year, we did BETTER by nearly 10% than we did the last time this POS was put to a vote?

You can keep slamming black voters all you want, but it's not a fact. It was OLDER voters that voted for H8. And there was a big Catholic shift in the last two weeks before the election.

Younger minority voters did not vote for H8. Darn, that should be good news. :)

[dsc]

65. several things

One, since neither of us know what proportion of blacks voted for the 1996 measure we have no idea if the percentage of blacks voting for this went up, down, or stayed the same. Thus comparing then to now is useless for this purpose. Second, if there has been a net migration of blacks from California, as has been stated here, then it would have had two effects. One, it would have lowered the proportion of blacks among total voters and it would have made the average age of the remaining voters go up. The first effect would explain the fact the total against increased in the face of higher black turnout and the second would make those blacks who remained more likely to have voted for the propostion. This isn't about blaming blacks. It is about understanding we have a humungous problem in that community that needs fixed if we are to have a pope's prayer of being able to recind this measure.

[noiretextatique]

69. alameda county has a large black population

with a long history of political activism. 5.2 million people voted for prop 8, and of course all of them weren't black. to conclude that "there is a huge problem in that community" based on the total numbers in california is just ridiculous.

[EFerrari]

76. Alameda County has twice the black population as the state average.

This whole thing is bullshit.

[dsc]

78. It isn't based on total numbers

It is based on numbers from largely black areas. Sadly segregated housing makes it very easy to get a rough percentage of which races voted which way. And those numbers suggest pretty strongly that blacks voted for issue 8 in quite large numbers.

[noiretextatique]

82. please tell me...because i am not understanding

what the problem is with the percentage? is it that people expected a different result? if so, why?

as we already know, the NO on 8 campaign didn't do much in terms of reaching out the certain communities.

[dsc]

86. absolutely

and if we continue to pretend that those communities didn't vote against us we still won't reach out. The 70% poll is most likely wrong and apparently high. But that said, the real percentage is likely in the low 60's. That means we need to reach out in 2010, 2012 or whenever we next have this voted on. But the first step is admitting the problem exists.

[EFerrari]

90. A problem exists, all right, and it is yours. n/t

[dsc]

97. go the fuck ahead and ignore blacks again and lose again

Just please don't blame me when it happens. Ignoring the fact that blacks voted against this in droves will directly cause it to lose again.

[EFerrari]

110. I am only too happy to ignore your skewed evaluation of this vote.

Frankly, I don't need to keep reading this crap. You've been given many opportunities to know better.

Ignore that it was senior voters and Catholics that pushed this vote. Keep alienating your natural allies. That will work.

There is more work to do in the black and Latino communities. As there is in other ones.

But I hope I never again read here that black people shouldn't vote. Because that is just fucking beyond the pale, especially when you base than on one fucking Mitofsky poll that has been debunked.

If you don't understand that, that's completely your problem.

[noiretextatique]

91. reaching out would be a step

another step is to adjust expectations. clearly, not every black person is going to support gay rights, most for the same reasons as whites, latinos and asians. i take objection to the notion that black people owe gay people their votes...that is not a coherent strategy or a realistic expectation. clearly we need to do better in forming coalitions and supporting each other's concerns. i don't believe white gay people are any more of less supportive of affirmative action, for example, than the white straight people.

is it realistic, in your opinion, for african americans to have the same expectation of support from the gay community as the gay community (apparently) has regarding the black community?

some have used the election of obama as proof, but i chalk that up to self-interest considering what a horrible mess bush, inc created. some have suggested that people who have experienced discrimination should automatically support minority rights, yet i wonder how many of those same people voted for the vile prop 187 a few years ago, which sought to deny healthcare and other services to illegal immigrants. it passed also, but was held up in litigation for years and never became law.

[dsc]

94. gays have repeatedly shown themselves willing to vote for black candidates

and I have no idea about affirmative action. But the simple fact is gays supported mayors Dinkins, Bradley and Washington in large numbers. And of course, Obama.

[noiretextatique]

98. self-interest would be my guess

or do white gay people believe that by supporting a black candidate, they are somehow helping black people in general?

[dsc]

102. who knows

but your claim that gay support is a one way street is baldly false. Gays voted for black candidates when damn few whites would and have done so overtime. But the thanks we get is to be called racist for pointing out what the election returns clearly showed. Oh, and if we dare ask for affirmative action for ourselves (name one gay cabinet member) and all hell breaks loose.

[noiretextatique]

109. who is "we?"

i am a lesbian so who is this "we" you are talking about? i don't know if WHITE gay people vote for black candidates more than BLACK gay people or WHITE straight people, so i will take your word for that WE.
i think it's time for an openly gay cabinet member...so again, i am not sure which WE you are referring to.

i would hope white people, gay and otherwise, voted for obama because he was the best candidate...likewise with other black candidates. i voted for a jewish lesbian for the school board even though her competitors was just as competent and progressive.

[dsc]

128. You don't have to take my word for it

you can look up history. Mayor Washington carried one, count it one white ward in the entire city of Chicago. The ward was the ward with the gay neighborhood and jews. Dinkins carried only two white demographics in NYC, gays and jews.

[mondo joe]

119. I think white gay people are generally supportive of progressive ideals.

Black candidates tend to be more progressive, though there's always the exception - an Alan Keyes or a Logcabin Republican somewhere.

Hence the votes.

[yardwork]

135. That's a very hurtful thing to say. Many white gay people have fought for black rights.

I don't do it expecting any kind of payback but simply because it is the right thing to do. It's offensive to be told that I've done it out of self-interest.

[noiretextatique]

138. why is that? isn't in your self-interest to live in a civil society?

and to support candidates who care about you? i take issue with the notion that i owe someone something because of something they supposedly did for me...i find that offensive, and that's what i responded to. i am not accusing you of this type of thinking, but i've seen it here in this thread and others.

[dsc]

140. just who started the notion that one group owed the other

hint it wasn't me. You were the one who asked about gay support of blacks and I responded. If you didn't want a response then you shouldn't have asked the question.

[noiretextatique]

145. my apologies, dsc

i did accuse you and i was wrong. i should have known better, but in my anger at others, i associated the "you owe us" meme with you. i sincerely apologize.

[yardwork]

142. Aren't we all our brothers keepers?

[noiretextatique]

143. yes...we are all connected

if i do something against my own best interest, it will likely hurt you too.

[EFerrari]

84. What "it" are you talking about?

Prop 8 went down big time in Alameda County.

[EFerrari]

75. We know for a fact that there was a much bigger turnout among black voters this year

and that we did BETTER by ten points. Unless you want to argue that there was a smaller black turnout this year, you have to concede that both things are true. There was a much bigger black turnout AND we did better by 10 points.

And if you don't want to blame black voters, you may want to retract your statement that if they hadn't voted, the prop wouldn't have passed. The statement was wrong when you made it and we know that now to a certainty.

You are exaggerating the lack of support in the black community and overlooking the fact that it was older voters and the Catholic shift that made this POS pass. So, literally, we need to attend to the pope's vote -- which is not chock full of black votes.

The passage of Prop H8 has very little if anything at all to do with black voters. It had to do with age and religion. You may have a humungulous problem with the black community. They don't have a humungulous problem with you.

[David Zephyr]

152. I agree.

This thread is fly paper for those who want to scapegoat another minority. PelosiFan summed it up in the beginning of the thread.

A single turn of 1% or 2% of white voters would have sunk this proposition.

If we want to focus healthy anger, it should be at those that funded the proposition and everyone knows who that was. Without that money, this proposition would have never had a chance.

[noiretextatique]

42. 5.2 million people voted against Prop 8

in terms of the number of people who votes whites, latinos and asians far outnumbered african-americans. if african-americans were the only group voting, the percentages would mean something. but since we were only 10% of those who voted, the percentages are meaningless in terms of why Prop 8 passed. while it is true that if more black people had voted against it would not have passed, the same is true for white, latino and asian voters. it's also true for older voters, and catholic voters.

[dsc]

67. and please point to anywhere in that post

where I said only blacks voted for issue 8. Yes, I want the words ONLY BLACKS VOTED FOR ISSUE 8. You can't, because they are not there. But the simple fact is that a fairly large majority of black voters voted for issue 8. Even if the poll is flawed, the returns aren't. Black areas voted for issue 8 at around 60% or more. Was that the whole margin? Almost certainly not. Were they the sole yes votes? Of course not. But they did vote for it in droves. There is no escaping that simple, mathematical fact. And ignoring it is stupid.

[noiretextatique]

72. oh for pete's sake...what about the other 4.5 million?

has there been as much energy and ink expended on them as on the black 500,000 or so? NO, there hasn't. personally...i am sick of it. :wtf: are you going to DO about the HUGE problem of black people who voted YES on 8? or the other 4.5 million+ plus who also voted on it? NOT A DAMN THING. just as WE never rid this country of the KKK, homophobes of all stripes will continue to exist. if

and if we are going to form coalitions, it's not going to happen by lecturing black black people about how homophobic they are and what a huge problem it is for gay people. as in the case of african-americans, it's the courts that will force an ignorant and hateful majority to accept gay rights. simple math: 5.2 million vote YES. simple...10% of the voting population vs. 90%. yeah...let's keep harping on the 10% :eyes:

[Zuiderelle]

88. Yep! Exactly right.

[David Zephyr]

151. Well said.

:thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

89. You said if black voters hadn't voted, the proposition would have failed.

That's false. And you should own that.

[noiretextatique]

33. and i am calling bullshit on you

and all the other folks who keep propagating this racist talking point, which continues to deny the existence of black and gay people, and the black people who did not support Prop H8. so, if you aren't a racist, why are you advancing a racist talking point?

[Karenina]

35. Ms. Cannick has found her ticket

to 15 minutes of fame! She reads like another Ward Connelly or whatever that jackass' name is...

[noiretextatique]

36. right...here's a different perspective

By now, you may have seen or heard about the disturbing behaviors among the predominantly White gay protesters of Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage in California. Protesters have sent a suspicious white powdery substance to local churches, apparently to provoke an anthrax type scare, and most notably have blamed Black folks for their defeat against stopping Prop. 8.

To express their anger, some have attacked Blacks with the word "niggas." I even heard one exclaim that, "We gave you your first Black president. How dare you turn your back on us now!" Apparently their vote for Obama was an attempt at a disingenuous deal maker with Black people.

http://www.pr-inside.com/social-architect-activist-cleo-manago-addresses-r920540.htm

[Karenina]

41. Slam dunk.

"So, in solution, in the age of Obama, we need to be in real dialogue as a community about our cultural, philosophical, and sexuality diversity. As White gays protest against Blacks while disenfranchising the Black community in their political efforts for "gay marriage", they establish yet another reason Blacks and others have not jumped on their bandwagon. As can be attested to by the lack of Black support, including Black homosexual support against Prop. 8, education about such bills need to be presented in ways that affirm and engage Black people. The current mixture of Black "gay" silence and White homosexual racism will not garner Black support of same-sex anything, let alone marriage."

[noiretextatique]

46. it's a complicated issue

and it's not a new one. here in oakland, the gay community is pretty much segregated, and if that's the case HERE, i can only imagine what it is like elsewhere.

[FreeState]

51. Im in San Diego and its very segregated here

Not just among black and white gays (and Hispanic and Asian and mixed ethnicities and age etc) but lesbians and gay men as well. The only time I have seen all sides come together is for the protests against Prop 8. It's sad really. As a white gay man I often am ashamed that the gay community mimics so many of the mistakes the straight community has made, we should be better than that. We all are on the same side and need to get over both institutionalized racism and our own homophobia that lead to this. Its not that we dont get along so much as we dont take the time to understand each other and respect our different opinions and backgrounds. We would be a much stronger community and political force if we actively drew on all of our strengths and got over our cultural hang ups IMO.

[noiretextatique]

80. i agree

i make an effort to mix with everyone, but not everyone in the gay community does. as long as we are talking about race and the gay community, i think we should discuss everything. thanks for your honest response.

[bluedawg12]

104. has anyone (white, gay, or otherwise) been convicted of the powder scare?

http://www.pr-inside.com/social-architect-activist-cleo...
"By now, you may have seen or heard about the disturbing behaviors among the predominantly White gay protesters of Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage in California. Protesters have sent a suspicious white powdery substance to local churches, apparently to provoke an anthrax type scare..."
GAYS IN LOS ANGELES INDICT BLACKS AND DELIVER FAKE ANTHRAX
- from Cleo Manago
...........

This is from 11-14-08, this past Friday, is there newer information?
FBI: Powder sent to Mormon headquarters nontoxic
Fri Nov 14, 5:08 pm ET

SALT LAKE CITY – The FBI says the white powder that spilled onto a mail clerk's hand at the Utah headquarters of the Mormon church is nontoxic.

FBI spokesman Juan T. Becerra said Friday that tests came back negative. The powder was in an envelope opened Thursday that was sent to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City.

Another letter with a suspicious powder arrived Thursday at a Mormon temple in Los Angeles. It also has been determined to be nontoxic.

The temples were the sites of recent protests against the church's support for California's gay marriage ban.

Becerra says the FBI is still investigating both cases.

............

[noiretextatique]

111. did you read the rest of the article? eom

[bluedawg12]

112. Is that your answer to my question? n/t

[noiretextatique]

113. yes

the article is about more than who sent white powder. the author makes some interesting points about the relationship between the black and gay communities, and the black gay community.

[bluedawg12]

114. Simple question: How does anyone know who sent the powder?

Because if you don't, if law enforcement does not know, then, it is not fair to state:

"Protesters have sent a suspicious white powdery substance to local churches,..."

http://www.pr-inside.com/social-architect-activist-cleo ...

"By now, you may have seen or heard about the disturbing behaviors among the predominantly White gay protesters of Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage in California. Protesters have sent a suspicious white powdery substance to local churches, apparently to provoke an anthrax type scare..."
GAYS IN LOS ANGELES INDICT BLACKS AND DELIVER FAKE ANTHRAX
- from Cleo Manago

[noiretextatique]

115. i agree....how about the rest of the article?

it's possible it was written before the information was clear. i know the author, and though he made an error with one statement, the rest of the article is worth at least a cursory read.

[bluedawg12]

118. noiretblu: I read the entire article and other writings by Manago

The thing speak for itself.

http://www.pr-inside.com/social-architect-activist-cleo-manago-addresses-r920540.htm

>>By now, you may have seen or heard about the disturbing behaviors among the predominantly White gay protesters of Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage in California. Protesters have sent a suspicious white powdery substance to local churches, apparently to provoke an anthrax type scare, and most notably have blamed Black folks for their defeat against stopping Prop. 8.

To express their anger, some have attacked Blacks with the word "niggas." I even heard one exclaim that, "We gave you your first Black president. How dare you turn your back on us now!" Apparently their vote for Obama was an attempt at a disingenuous deal maker with Black people.

<snip>

An irrational affront on Blacks by the gay community is not unusual, but merely demonstrates symptoms of a larger historic issue of racism between the gay and Black communities.

<snip>

...........

>>
Currently, Prop. 8 protesters are conducting rallies throughout Los Angeles, but they have not brought their demonstrations to historically Black communities. Why? Given that it's the only community of color that they directly blame for their loss.

<snip>

The gay community has never addressed the Black community in ways that build bridges on this or any other issue. Despite the civil rights dialogue employed by the gay community, many gay organizations still practice blatant forms of racial exclusion.

<snip>

Yet, my concern is not the redundant problem of racist attitudes in the gay community.

<snip>

What I find troubling is the silence of the so-called Black gay leaders in Los Angeles. During this gay onslaught of hatred, where is the Black gay community? We cannot use the excuse that there are not any who are "out"!

<snip>

Consequently, I understand why people in the Black community question the relevance, safety and value of gay as a viable identity in the Black community. Not that I agree with any form of oppression, I merely understand the suspect. This is because the so-called "Black gay community" has yet, itself, to effectively address the Black community. It has rarely even been present in the Black community in progressive ways, only showing up when it's time to call someone Black homophobic.

<snip>

So, in solution, in the age of Obama, we need to be in real dialogue as a community about our cultural, philosophical, and sexuality diversity. As White gays protest against Blacks while disenfranchising the Black community in their political efforts for "gay marriage", they establish yet another reason Blacks and others have not jumped on their bandwagon. As can be attested to by the lack of Black support, including Black homosexual support against Prop. 8, education about such bills need to be presented in ways that affirm and engage Black people. The current mixture of Black "gay" silence and White homosexual racism will not garner Black support of same-sex anything, let alone marriage.
<snip>


He explains his position in this speech at the Million Man March:

http://cleomanagosblog.livejournal.com/
2005

"That I’m up here, a same-gender-loving Brother, indicates that there is great possibility that this can happen. Mind you, I’ve been called a Black nationalist most of my life. Most recently – a separatist, by the gay community. There are some, among Blacks, especially among those who identify as gay, who believe that White people are more tolerant of homosexuality than Blacks; that Blacks in particular are hell on homosexuals. Yet, material truth contradicts this premise. Brutal attacks on Black homosexuals by Blacks do occur (especially between Black homosexuals). But outside of this sub-culture, violent attacks that lead to death or disfigurement are very rare in Black communities, nationally. Most brutal or deadly attacks on homosexuals occur among Whites. And their victims have included Black, White, and Latino homosexuals and transgendered people.

Black community attacks tend to be emotional. The tendency to hear males constantly referring to each other as punks, sissies, the B-word and fags is higher among Black males than in most other groups. These terms along with any direct critiques of homosexuality, can make Black homosexuals and bisexuals feel painfully self-conscious, judged, afraid and violently oppressed. Especially if their family is so-called Christian (I’ll explain so-called Christian later), includes a father who is angrily insecure about his manhood or sexuality; or there’s a mother who is angry at the missing father, or where family members are adamant or abusive in their disapproval Yet, typically, in the Black community when the words punk, sissy, the B-word or fag are used, they may or may not be referencing the subject’s sexuality or so-called sexual preference. But what is ALWAYS being gauged with these words is the level of manhood. These words aim to establish that some one ain’t representing as a Black “man.”

<snip>

If, from observation, you believe your child may be a homosexual, because of instinct or choices you see them make (for example, a young girl is more masculine than you would like, a boy more feminine), don’t disfigure them emotionally. Don’t defensively and brutally use so-called Christianity as a weapon to convince them of what else to be. Remember what Christ would do, if nothing else. (That many of us forget is what I meant earlier by so-called Christianity.)

Regardless of your own biases and preferences for your children, help make sure they don’t hate themselves so much they grow up to become an enemy of the Black community. This is very common, and the gay community takes advantage of this. Help them not to spend so much time questioning their worth that they allow themselves to be at-risk for HIV, or run to the White, often racist gay community for shelter, so they don’t commit suicide, self–destruct or wind up physically or mentally dead. You have to love this child – for the rest of your life.

<snip>
Just love them, provide direction, give them confidence as Black human beings, actively teach them to avoid internalized oppression as Black and male, Black and female as Black and possibly same-gender-loving.
......

http://cleomanagosblog.livejournal.com/
Rev. Al Sharpton Pledges Fight Against Homophobia Among Blacks!!
August 2005

Regarding the 'Sharpton against "Homophobia" issue: Sharpton needs to be
careful. Instead of the (possible) whole-hearted support of "gayness," he
should consider spearheading some community dialogue on the issue - at
least in addition. Some of what appears as anti-homosexual attitudes,
particularly in Black communities (including the church), is a justifiable,
if not dysfunctionally expressed, concern about the possible symptoms of
micro and macro oppression and repression on Black males historically.
Manhood anxieties and Black male compromise concerns are deeply connected
to these sometimes badly and/or abusively expressed attitudes. Which
contributes to why there is so much inner-group vicious oppression between
homosexuals too, which does the same level of harm if not more than
so-called "homophobia" from outside.

That some in the community are concerned, and have strong reactions to
"gayness" can be a result of ignorance about sexual differences, a
side-effect of Black male/manhood humiliation (i.e. 50% of Black males in
NYC are unemployed) and the still under addressed issue of sexual
abuse experienced by some of our young males.

This issue of gayness and homosexuality is under addressed, particularly in
Black communities. Sharpton, just willy-nilly advocating acceptance of
"gayness" with no evident expertise on this issue may affirm white gays,
who don't even need Sharpton, and Blacks adapting that culture

...........

[noiretextatique]

127. do you have an opinion on all of this?

i don't agree with everything he's written, but i think his perspective is interesting.

[bluedawg12]

146. noiretblu: I read your link and more to see where he was coming from

It is an interesting perspective and it constitutes my introduction to him.

I also sense that this is just one writer, blogger, black SGL (gay) activist in the black community and I am not sure if he speaks for some, many or mostly himself.

Mr. Manago coined the term SGL, same gender love:

From Wikipedia,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same_gender_loving

>>Same gender loving, or SGL, a term coined for African American use by activist Cleo Manago, is a description for homosexuals, particularly in the African-American community. It emerged in the early 1990s<1> and is often used by those who prefer to distance themselves from terms that they see as associated with "white-dominated" lesbian, gay, and bisexual communities. The term includes both down-low and openly homosexual persons within the black communities. It is also considered by some to be more descriptive of emotional links between gay men than the identity "gay". Though the term was first used by Manago as an attempt to separate from what he perceives as the "gay, white establishment", its actual meaning is not race-specific.

In a 2004 study of African American men, most of whom were recruited from black gay organizations, 12% identified as same gender loving, while 53% identified as gay.<3> Men attending Black Gay Pride Festivals in nine U.S. cities in 2000 responded similarly, with 10% identifying as same gender loving, 66% as gay, and 14% as bisexual.<<

I thought this was interesting and a good argument that I had not been exposed to, namely, an African American, male, who is part of the NOI, making an arugment on behalf of who he is.

http://www.qrd.org/qrd/www/culture/black/articles/sissy.html

Here his group AWO Study Center, argues well:
FOR SUPPORT OF SAME GENDER LOVING PEOPLE OF AFRICAN DESCENT'S INCLUSION IN AFRICAN SPIRITUAL COMMUNITIES AND HEALING CIRCLES

http://www.awostudycenter.com/Articles/art_sgl.htm

Here he speaks about something different:

http://cleomanagoonline.blogspot.com/

Sunday, January 13, 2008
Senator Barack Obama, America's Media Black Out and Fear of a Black Planet!

Written by Cleo Manago

In 1988 (when Jesse Jackson and Lenora Fulani ran for president), and again in 2004, when people, mostly White people, actively fantasized about General Colin Powell running for president, I made a prediction. I predicted that when and if a “Black” person did become president, either they would look White, or be half White. This, because of a need among Whites to both defect the reality of ripe racism in America (and their resulting privilege) with the right ”Black” person running as president. It would be important to ensure that this person have enough White identification (and historic Black American disassociation) to make Whites feel comfortable.

<snip>

This writer believes that recent history (including that there are still no independent, self-determined Black voices on prime-time television) indicates that there is fear among Whites of an influential Black person, especially male, swaying the Black masses to exact retribution on Whites. Obama’s popularity among some Whites may embody that agenda.

I am not suggesting that we challenge Mr. Barack’s bid for the White house, or that we not support him. I will be voting for him my self. That will be my experiment. Yet, I believe it is important that we are clear on Barack Obama’s relationship to who are now called African Americans, and that history. If Barack Obama is the next president of the United States, and it is possible he will be, this may be the beginnings of a new American aesthetic. But, it won’t necessarily be on terms that heal or transform Black American wounds, or make up for hundreds of years of particularly brutal enslavement and racism in America.

If Barack Obama wins, will he really be America’s first “African American” president, or the convenient arrival of a half-White “Black” presidential symbol to deflect White fear of Black retribution in America?

............

More important, since you introduced this writer, you must have thought his perspective important and had a reason for sharing and referencing him.

How do you see Manago's writings from your perspective?

And how do we build bridges with those who, "prefer to distance themselves from terms that they see as associated with "white-dominated" lesbian, gay, and bisexual communities?"

[yardwork]

120. Are you the author of the article?

Can you provide a link to the entire article? I can't find it here - just excerpts.

[noiretextatique]

125. cleo manago is the author

http://www.pr-inside.com/social-architect-activist-cleo...

[yardwork]

130. That link doesn't work for me. Are you Cleo Manago?

[noiretextatique]

132. no...i am not cleo manago

the article was a post on on his blog, so i am not sure if it's archived or what.

[yardwork]

134. The link doesn't work.

[noiretextatique]

137. i believe bluedawg posted the article

at the bottom of this thread.

[yardwork]

144. I read the article at the bottom of this thread and I don't think I have the perspective to comment.

This reads like an excerpt from a personal blog, in which the writer is musing on his own feelings about a difficult, complex subject. I'm not in a position to comment in any substantive way.

I do get the impression that the writer is somewhat frustrated by the comments of certain well-known African American figures. I can understand that feeling, as I am often frustrated when non-gay people assume that the comments of well-known gay people reflect the opinions of every gay person.

[mondo joe]

116. Are you accusing gay people of an Anthrax scare?

[noiretextatique]

126. no, but the author is

and his claim has been proven false.

[EFerrari]

49. The map that I saw of San Francisco +H8 precincts

were clearly the areas where there are a lot of retirees. For example, near Chinatown there are residence hotels where a lot of seniors live. So, people look at the location and think, Asians. But, the polls don't bear that out. It was seniors living in some of the cheapest housing in town on the borders of Chinatown. There are very few black or Latino residents there, btw. I know because Doug lived in one of those places for about a year. Seniors.

[noiretextatique]

50. are seems to be the demographic

that really hurt No on Prop 8.

[noiretextatique]

99. i mean AGE eom

[bluedawg12]

105. "deny the existence of black and gay people"

Denying the existence of black gay people and failing to build bridges?

According to Mr. Manago, the White gay Human Rights Campaign (HRC) did ask for a voice in 2005 at the NOI MMM (milion man march).

But, MMM organizers had already established that BMX founder Cleo Manago would speak. The HRC effort was called, "disrespectful."

Mr. Manago has been a member of the NOI since he was fourteen, so while it might make more sense that he was given a chance to speak, it does not explain why an attempt to speak by the HRC was rejected, nor does it support Mr. Manago's assertion that there have been no attetmps to build bridges. That's just one quick example of an attempt to build bridges from Mr. Manago's writings and press coverage.

http://www.pr-inside.com/social-architect-activist-cleo-manago-addresses-r920540.htm

The gay community has never addressed the Black community in ways that build bridges on this or any other issue-Cleo Manago 2008


http://cleomanagosblog.livejournal.com/

November 8th, 2005

BMX is known among west coast members of the Nation of Islam (NOI) as a “unique,” progressive Black community organization.

In 1998 NOI members at Mosque #27 in Los Angeles collaborated with BMX to sponsor a debate on “Homosexuality in the Black Community.” At the time the NOI’s intentions were to put the “abominations” in their place, publicly. What occurred instead was a Black affirming lesson they would never forget, on the presence of homosexuals and bisexuals throughout the Diaspora and Black history. BMX won that debate.


<snip>

At an October 5th MMM Washington D.C. press conference, Akbar Muhammad, international representative for the NOI, announced that the Black Men’s Xchange (BMX) would represent at the MMM march October 15th.

The announcement came in response to “gay representative” questions by a few people in attendance who were gay-identified and or who represented "Black gay" organizations funded by the White gay 'Human Rights Campaign (HRC).'

In reaction, the "Black" HRC funded organization reported to the White gay press that BMX was “separatist” and "not acceptable."

Following this attack they began a gay media campaign to create dissension, empathy for them and coerce MMM organizers to make another choice. This included submitting a list of 10 other speaker possibilities, and setting up numerous meetings and a ‘photo op’ with NOI staff and Farrakhan.

Though MMM organizers had already established that BMX founder Cleo Manago would speak, on the morning of the march, at 8:00 a.m. a desperate move was made by the leader of the HRC funded “Black” gay group.

In a disrespectful, last stitch effort to speak, he attempted to crash the MMM march. When this was not successful he spearheaded a deceptive media campaign, claiming to have been snubbed at the last minute. He opportunistically took full advantage of the ignorance of his constituency, and of the racist biases in the media that had already resulted in total disinterest among the Nation of Islam, Farrakhan and BMX members to even address the press.

...........

Mr. Manago did speak - here's is an excerpt:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/10/prweb300424.htm

All Press Releases for October 21, 2005

Longtime Activist Cleo Manago Selected by Minister Farrakhan as Voice of Black "Gay" Community
History Made As Same-Gender-Loving Community is Embraced at HIstoric Millions More Movement

Discussing the importance of acknowledging and affirming SGL and bisexual folks as part of the healing necessary for the Black family, Manago stated, “As we plan for the political and economic strengthening of our communities, so that the framework is not vulnerable to inter-group conflict, we have to take care of our people. Because, movements are made up of people. Parallel to the Minister’s brilliant MMM plan, I suggest that there be mental health and restoration intervention for Black people. Because many of us need it. We need cultural affirmation courses. Because many of us do not know who we are. We need healing opportunities particular to the Black experience that explicitly acknowledge our diversity, which would include same-gender-loving Sisters and Brothers, non-religious folks, powerful women, people who are differently-abled physically, and others loyal to the Black unity, life and success.”
.........

[yardwork]

53. #1 The term "political correctness" and its kin are right-wing phrases.

I've never met a progressive who used the term "politically correct" or anything like it.

#2 Who funded the Yes on Prop 8 campaign? Who came up with the idea? Who told their congregations that they would go to hell if they didn't support discrimination against gay people? Here's a hint - their skin is pale, as pale as mine.

#3 You're ignoring all the people of color who are gay. How do you think they feel about this? Is your OP helping or hurting?

#4 On that subject, exactly how is your OP intended to help in any way? What good can possible come of it?

Let's join together and fight for all people's human rights.

[FreeState]

55. "How do you think they feel about this? Is your OP helping or hurting?"

Thats a good measure to remember when commenting on this IMO. One I wish you would remember when referring to Mormons as well.

There were 34,589 individual contributions made to Yes on 8 (that does not mean 34,589 people contributed but that many receipts and many people donated more than once). Guess how many Mormons there are in California? In 2006 it was 761,763 (per the US census). So 70% of the donations were from Mormons or 24,212 LDS donors - meaning only 3.1% of mormons gave money - 96% of LDS members gave nothing. (this is also not taking into account that donors gave more than once so the actual number is is more than 96% gave nothing). Take into account that only 50% of Mormons are considered active that says something. There is a sizable amount of Mormons who for one reason or another did not listen to their Church and give money.

So how do you think they feel about this? Is your OP helping or hurting? As a gay man who's whole family is Mormon and disagreed with the Church its not helping thats for sure. Its put a huge strain on my family and friends. IMO we need to focus on attacking the Church leadership and not Mormons in general. Especially when the majority of Mormons gave nothing to the Yes on 8 campaign.

[yardwork]

56. Did you mean to respond to my post? I didn't say anything about Mormons in my post.

I've been very careful to distinguish between the leadership of organizations and their members.

I think that you either misunderstood my post or you were responding to somebody else.

[FreeState]

60. #2 in your post isnt referring to Mormons?

"#2 Who funded the Yes on Prop 8 campaign? Who came up with the idea? Who told their congregations that they would go to hell if they didn't support discrimination against gay people? Here's a hint - their skin is pale, as pale as mine."

http://crooksandliars.com/tags/mormons

"The Mormon Church has spent the last three months intimidating their members into giving money to "Yes on Prop 8" -- which would take marriage rights away from same-sex couples -- telling Mormon families that their "souls will be in jeopardy" if they do not contribute portions of their income."

If other church's did this Im not awair of it. However no matter what church did it we need focus on the Church leadership and not its membership because they are two different things.

[yardwork]

62. You aren't aware that the Catholic Church and fundamentalist churches also promoted Prop 8?

The Mormon Church is a newcomer to this campaign. The Catholics and many fundamentalist Protestant groups have been driving these campaigns for years. Again, I am careful to distinguish between the leadership and the many members of these organizations that disagree.

I am fully aware that this was no grass-roots uprising of Mormons (or Catholics or fundamentalists) across the country. This was totally engineered and financed by the leadership of those groups. This is the religious right in action. They've been doing this all over the country - they've passed anti-gay laws and/or constitutional amendments in forty states so far.

[FreeState]

63. Im aware of the Catholic involvement but was unaware they threatened there members if they did not

donate to the cause.

Also the Mormon Church has been fighting marriage equality since the early 90's and most likely earlier. They helped in Hawaii in the very first marriage equality case and came out against the ERA in part because they said it would lead to more gay people. They are not new to this.

Sounds like we agree on the most important part, attacking the leadership not the members. I did not mean to attack you on your post it just jolted out this thought that has been bothering me since Prop 8's passage. I think now that people are starting to really think about where we go from here these types of conversations are key in developing a plan towards full equality.

[yardwork]

64. Some Catholic leaders tell their followers that they will go to hell if they don't vote such and so.

I didn't realize that the Church of LDS had been actively discriminating against gay people for so long.

I try to be careful to distinguish between the leadership and the members of the groups, but there is a fine line. If a person tithes to their church or contributes to their church's general fund, and the church turns around and funds thinks like Proposition 8, then that member is supporting the leadership.

I'm not saying that everybody should leave their church if they disagree with leadership, but....things would be a lot better in this world if everyone stood up against human rights violations.

[FreeState]

71. Here's the rub on that - the LDS Church as an organization only donated 2k total

the money was donated by individual members at the insistence of the church - so it would not come out of a general fund. They did this specifically because of the $1 million they did donate in Hawaii caused problems so they are now trying to hide the contributions by intimidating members to make donations in their own names (the Bishops - think Pastor - calls the members individually into his office and asks for a donation and places each one in an unmarked white envelope addressed as a individuals donation).

Its all disgusting IMO.

The church actually because very anti-gay in comparison to its history in the 1970's when Spencer Kimball took over as Prophet. Before that the church did not put an emphasis on marriage like it does now.

[yardwork]

81. That's interesting.

I thought that the LDS leadership made a strategic mistake by exposing individual donors in this way, but now I see that it was the church itself covering up.

Either way, for some reason Prop 8 really hit a nerve and now a lot of people are paying attention - for the first time - to the way that the religious right is pushing anti-gay discrimination.

[kwassa]

57. Your math is off by a decimal point. Only 3.1 % of Mormons made donations for Prop 8.

Only 3.1% of Mormons made donations, if your other figures are correct.

[FreeState]

61. Thank you - fixed

thats what I get for doing math at work LOL:)


You can get the total number of donors to both sides here:

http://www.sfgate.com/webdb/prop8/?appSession=283467309891049

[mondo joe]

117. Their tithing, however, supports a church that runs their anti gay campaign, and

gets those individual contributions.

So in the end, any tithing Mormon is supporting this shit.

[Spectral Music]

93. Rappers have been calling women "bitches" and "hos" for years and, hey, no biggie

It's just like using anti gay slurs.

[Zuiderelle]

100. And here we have yet another newbie jumping on the bandwagon.

Gee, I wonder why.

[Spectral Music]

101. Excuse me?

Are you trying to accuse me of something?

[bluedawg12]

107. Perspective from a black, SGL, male

http://cleomanagosblog.livejournal.com/

Sunday, March 26th, 2006
9:34 pm ARE BLACK MEN NOT ALL JUST A BUNCH OF PUNK FAGGOTS? PROVE IT!

"When one person, especially male, especially a Black male insults or attacks another, often if the one attacked does not defend himself he is seen as a punk bitch. Using that equation, a non response by Black males to the media's most recent assault, overall, could appear to be a punk reaction. If most Black males are not punks, where is the evidence?

When Black people, especially men, become powerful, and begin to unlearn the symptoms of post traumatic slave syndrome (PTSS), recover from intergenerational racism resistance fatigue (IRRF), support each other toward that end, and stop falling for ineffective distractions like gay-identity, interracial partnerships (or the avoidance of intimacy with other Black people), corporate approval, Euro-Christianity (this is our main sleeping pill), sex addiction and other substance based anesthesia (escape), internalized white supremacy, self-hate and self concept disorientation, and replace it all with courage, mental health therapy, critical thinking, a plan of action and ’’balls’’ - our condition will change.


A Black person, especially a male who has succumbed to all listed and has not revived is seen as a ''fag.'' And that’s a lot of ''fags.'' Black people react to Black male ''faggottry'' (the apparent lack of community beneficial Black male power, presence and advocacy) because of being humiliated about the compromise of the Black male (the symptomologies presented in a recent NY Times article on the 'Deepening Plight of Black men'). Subconsciously, instinctly and situationally, many Black folks fear that most Black men are losers and ''fags'' (not meaning just homosexual, that's just an easy excuse, but compromised by the American experience, socially/institutionally/culturally constructed Black male inadequacy). In general the resistance to same gender loving (SGL) women is a reaction to the existence of a Black woman who doesn't need or want a man - even more humiliation for the Black male (in his heterosexual eyes). Religion (with all its severe hypocrisy) is the excuse and the filter Black humiliation and anxiety typically comes through. But behind this dramatic veil is the turmoil of a community reeling from the 500 year old compromise of its manhood, its self control, its sense of self. And that is not a completely irrational state in a society, America, that has always had a patriarchal disposition."
.......

http://www.dogonvillage.com/african_american_news/Articles/00000328.html

For the past two decades Cleo Manago has campaigned on behalf of the same-gender-loving (SGL), gay/lesbian-identified and bisexual members of the Black community and community at-large. As founder and CEO of the Los Angeles based AmASSI Health & Cultural Centers in Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta and South Africa, and founder of Black Men's Xchange (BMX), his efforts have been heralded internationally. Manago's stance regarding cultural affirmation, self imaging and community dialogue are only a few of the key components he has successively purported to positively impact a change in society's awareness and acceptance of the Black SGL community.
........