This is the first in a series of statements about why it is imperative that the gay community, the African-American community, and the new administration address the growing tensions between the African-American and the gay community, and do so now. This is not an exhaustive statement. I intend to keep developing it in subsequent postings on this theme.§ The historic election of an African-American to the presidency, an event celebrated by many Americans, in particular those who have fought hard for recognition of the human rights of all, highlights growing tensions between some African Americans and some gays.
§ This is particularly true when commentators are interpreting exit poll data to suggest that a high percentage of African-American voters in California—perhaps 70%—voted for proposition 8. Polls in Florida are suggesting as well that African-American voters there voted heavily for amendment 2.
§ Since exit polls show the same voters voting overwhelmingly for Mr. Obama, the victory of Obama—who was supported strongly by most gay Americans—simultaneously points to the progress African Americans have made towards equal rights, and the lack of such progress by the LGBT community. In fact, the vote in California actually removed a right from gay citizens after the state Supreme Court had recognized that right as constitutional.
§§ As I recently noted (http://bilgrimage.blogspot.com/2008/11/late-breaking-news-why-some-americans.html), Shaun Jacob Harper states that “[t]he Obama victory was undoubtedly historic and groundbreaking, but it has come at a price: the aggrandizement and intensification of hostility between Blacks and gays.” In Harper’s view, the African-American voted played an “overwhelming—though not singularly determinative—role” in passing proposition 8.
§ Many gay citizens are reading what happened in California as the choice of a minority community that has struggled for its own rights to remove rights from another minority community. This produces anger and is exacerbating tensions that some commentators within the gay community have been noting for some time.
§§ On repeated efforts of some gay commentators to address these concerns, with the sense that there has not been a warm reception for them in some African-American circles, see http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/11/an-answer-to-pr.html.
§§ It is very important to note the persistent, and powerful, efforts of African-American gay thinkers such as Pam Spaulding to address both the racism of many “mainstream” gay Americans, and the homophobia of some sectors of the African-American community: see Pam’s House Blend blog, linked to this blog.
§ In reaction to initial anger within the gay community when the exit poll data first appeared, some commentators both within the African American and the gay community have noted that it is entirely inaccurate to blame black voters for the victory of proposition 8.
§ The coalition that pushed proposition 8 through was broad and was widely grounded in (and heavily funded by) many religious groups, including the LDS church, the Catholic church, and evangelical churches.
§ It is incorrect to conclude that African-American voters unilaterally pushed proposition 8 through. Those primarily responsible for the success of proposition 8 were some faith-based movements acting in alliance with the political right, which has consistently sought to politicize gay rights to attract neoconservative voters.
§ At the same time, there are undeniable tensions between the African-American and the gay community, and it would be counterproductive for both communities (and the nation as a whole) to deny that these exist. Moreover, they are now heightened by proposition 8 and recent rhetoric about that vote, and the election of an African-American president shines a spotlight on them.
§ I have blogged repeatedly about these issues, and have repeatedly called for coalition building and dialogue across cultural and religious boundary lines to address these issues. The open letter to Mr. Obama I posted on this blog was an appeal to Obama to continue addressing these issues as an African-American leader who has spoken courageously in support of gay rights.
§ It is impossible to ignore the heightened tensions between the black and gay community (or, more precisely, some black and some gay communities) now, because both the media and the religious-political right are already spinning what appears to have taken place in the anti-gay votes in California and Florida as an indicator of growing division between the African-American and the gay community.
§§ As an illustration, and an indicator that this interpretation of the vote gained immediate attention even outside the U.S., see www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/07/us-elections-2008-gay-rights.
§ And, even if we want to continue tweaking the data and arguing about what they mean, we have no choice except to engage the narrative of division.
§ The narrative of black-gay division is there in part because the religious right (factions of which are strong in almost every mainline church) has developed this narrative in recent years to drive wedges between people of color and gays. And immediately after the vote in California, that effort began to receive renewed attention in right-wing religious and political circles.
§§ For an instance of the immediate spinning of the narrative of division by a neoconservative commentator, see Jonah Goldberg’s 7 November commentary in the Chicago Tribune (www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-oped1107goldbergnov07,0,4837400.story). Goldberg sifts the data to conclude, “In other words, Obama had some major un-progressive coattails. The tidal wave of black and Hispanic voters who came out to support Obama voted in enormous numbers against what most white liberals consider to be the foremost civil rights issue of the day.”
§§ For one among many religious-right attempts to exploit the results with gay-rights initiatives in this election to continue probing the gay-black division in church circles, see Mark Tooley’s post-election IRD article on the United Methodist Church (www.theird.org/NETCOMMUNITY/Page.aspx?pid=822&srcid=822).
§ There are strong indicators now that, in an election in which the religious right and neoconservatives appear to have been soundly defeated on all sides, the “victory” over gays in several places in this election will become the new rallying point for these movements, as they try to reconstitute themselves in Obama’s America.
§§ On the singular “victory” of the right in this election around issues of gay rights, see Frank Rich’s op-ed article in the 9 November New York Times (www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/opinion/09rich.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink): “Though Rove’s promised ‘permanent Republican majority’ lies in humiliating ruins, his and Bush’s one secure legacy will be their demagogic exploitation of homophobia. The success of the four state initiatives banning either same-sex marriage or same-sex adoptions was the sole retro trend on Tuesday. And Obama, who largely soft-pedaled the issue this year, was little help.”
§§ For a powerful statement by an African-American progressive thinker on the barring of same-sex marriages as the greatest “lingering vestige of systemic bigotry” in “the new age of Barack Obama bigotry, see John Ridley’s statement at www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/obama-wins-and-so-does-fe_b_142213.html.
§ Not merely the gay community, but the nation as a whole—and the new administration—needs to pay attention to this development and work to counteract it. It has the potential to present the Obama administration early on with the kind of challenge Clinton received when he dealt with the question of gays in the military.
§§ On proposition 8 as the “first test case for Barack Obama of his real support for gays and lesbians,” see Anderson Cooper’s 7 November CNN 360 program, linked to the After Elton blog at www.afterelton.com/blog/brianjuergens/anderson-cooper-360-proposition-8-fallout.
§ I would argue that Clinton’s retreat on that issue significantly impaired his administration. His apparently willingness to retreat from the language of human rights as the primary focus of a new left-center political coalition for expedient political (social, economic) decisions that leaned constantly in a center-right direction emboldened those opposed to him. It also weakened him as a leader, and undermined his effectiveness from the outset of his administration.
§ A retreat on human rights at the beginning of the Obama administration would have similar effects. I have no doubt that there are strong forces within Obama’s circle of advisors encouraging him to focus on the economy and not play into the interests of those who want to use culture-war issues to divide and weaken the new administration.
§ And Mr. Obama himself may tend towards that judgment—i.e., he may think that dealing with the serious economic crisis and other serious issues carried over from the previous administration must necessarily trump the less serious or even frivolous issue of gay rights/gay marriage.
§ If one pays careful attention to many progressive commentators now providing advice on blogs and the media for the new administration, there is a strong implication to that effect. By their silence about the issue of gay rights—and, in particular, about what just took place in California—these commentators imply that gay rights are a secondary concern, and should be addressed (if at all) only after the nation’s economic house is in order.
§ The success of Obama’s platform of change for the nation depends—and crucially so—on his ability to retrieve and articulate a vision of human rights and solidarity that revives key themes of American participatory democracy that have been assaulted by almost half a century of neoconservative rule.
§ To do that, Obama has to build a platform that draws together many disparate constituencies energized that that vision and by those key themes. Conceding to liberal pragmatism, right-wing bullying, or remaining silent now in the face of a significant attack on the human rights of a group of citizens in this nation at the beginning of his administration will undermine the effectiveness of that administration.
