Next step on Prop 8: talking to black women

Part of the aftermath of Prop. 8 was that liberals had to deal with a clear divide between two interest groups, gays and African Americans. Another large part of the debate was the ineffectiveness of the No on Prop. 8 campaign, which Andrew Sullivan has chronicled extensively.

Charles Blow, an African American columnist at the NY Times, has an excellent post that combines these two concerns. Specifically, he writes, gay activists should target black women, who tend to attend church more regularly than black men. Black women also have complicated views of marriage.

One reason this is so important is that I heard essentially no discussion of any of this before the election. The issue on Prop. 8, from the "No" side, was simple: it's an issue of civil rights and the right to love someone. What Blow explains, in what is easily the best piece I have read about this, is that those issues are not - pardon the pun - black and white for black women. Many are not married, and might see gay men as more competition. So a large part of the failure by the LGBT community on Prop. 8 can be attributed, unfortunately, to a failure to understand the perspective of the opposition. That problem is quickly being addressed. One thing that strikes me as odd, however, is that after so many gay marriage initiatives in so many states (at least 30), that these issues are only now coming up.

I would love to see a similar post about homosexuality and black men, because I have a feeling that there is just as complicated a constellation of issues (but different ones) for black men and gay marriage. For example, the use of the term "boy" to refer to black men is a tool to denigrate their masculinity. How does a tradition of fighting for their pride as men affect black men's view of gay men? I'm not sure, and I'm not sure I'm qualified to address the issue, but it seems like something that should be explored if we are to make progress on this issue.

This is also a great opportunity to explore what I call the "repairing the psychological damage" phase of civil and equal rights in this country.

All of us have some degree of psychological trauma, from being embarrassed at a party, to failing an exam, to being divorced, to the death of a loved one. We all have ways of dealing with it, usually involving other people, particularly family. And almost all of us eventually recover from each episode.

But African Americans in this country have, collectively, far more trauma than the rest of us can even imagine. Moreover, they do not necessarily have the same strong families that the non-black people do, because of that collective trauma. The civil rights movement took the first steps towards integrating minorities into mainstream American society, and thereby repairing that trauma. With the election of Barack Obama, we have taken a very large step towards collective healing, on all sides.

But the trauma is still there, and there is still a great deal of healing to be done. We cannot take that healing for granted; some of it will take place over the natural course of time, but some of it won't. Blow's piece is a great example of what has to happen.

Much of this argument about "healing" could just as easily apply to feminism and women, or Hispanics and immigration.

The best part of a healing process, of course, is what happens after it's over.

No Gays for a Day

Joel Stein, the laziest, but occasionally most inspired newspaper columnist in America, hits it out of the park today. In response to the passage of Prop. 8, he is proposing a "No Gays for a Day" day, sort of like the the day without a Mexican thing a couple of years ago. It's an incredibly simple idea: everyone gay will take the day off of work, to highlight how many gay people there are in this country, and what life would be like without them.

I love it. I think it's a great idea. It's very funny, which any protest movement could use. It's going to be on December 5th, which is my mother's birthday. Mom will be supportive.

The opportunities for camp are just wonderful. What's Ellen going to do? I can see her spending several days leading up to this talking about it, and then running a rerun on the day of, and then spending a day or two afterwards talking about it. Maybe she could go on Oprah's show.

A brilliant opportunity for gay people to take themselves seriously and not seriously at the same time. Take a vacation to protest! Laughing and crying at the same time.

Many, many people will not get the joke. But for those of us who do, it could be a great tonic. Make that a vodka and tonic.

What happened with Prop. 8

The LA Times, in an excellent editorial, nails a large part of what happened with Proposition 8, which made marriage in California a strictly heterosexual affair:

Ever since Proposition 8 passed Nov. 4, enshrining heterosexual-only marriage in the California Constitution, demonstrators from Sacramento to San Diego have staged daily marches and protests to express their anger and disappointment that homosexuals will continue to be treated as second-class citizens. It's a stirring movement, reminiscent of past civil rights struggles, but it raises a troubling question: Where were these marchers before the election?

Like nearly every aspect of the fight against Proposition 8, the recent protests come too late to make a difference. Opponents of the measure ran a disorganized campaign that consistently underestimated the strength of the other side. Apparently lulled by poll numbers that showed the initiative was likely to fail, the campaign's fundraising efforts were lackluster -- until it discovered that the Yes on 8 side was raking in millions from Mormons and members of other churches. By the time fundraising began in earnest, there wasn't time to mount a strong opposition.

I wouldn't have put it this way during the campaign, but I think there was a sense of complacency on the part of many gays for most of the campaign. Ironically, I think that sense of complacency came in part from success; I have a feeling that many gay people currently living in California feel very comfortable being out, and experience little, if any, discrimination in their personal lives. If you're gay and living in a large metro area, say, San Fran or LA, you probably just don't know many people who would be opposed to gay marriage. So it didn't occur to most gay people in those cities that there are large parts of California where gay marriage is not accepted. I know one gay man, who has never mentioned any kind of gay activism, who was suddenly sending out passionate emails about Prop. 8 - two days before the election. He just bought a house with his boyfriend, and I think he was fully expecting that they would move in together and then get married. I don't think it occurred to him that Prop. 8 might pass until he saw the polls just before the election. Then he freaked. He was seriously depressed after Prop. 8 passed.

Laws banning gay marriage have passed in many states. If gay people are to achieve equality, all of those laws are going to have to be overturned. I am optimistic that will happen, eventually, but I am not optimistic that it is going to happen any time soon. But if there is a silver lining in this, it is that a large and powerful community has been awoken. There's an old saying in politics that people rebel when they have hope. My guess is that people in states in the heartland, where being gay is not quite as hip as it is in LA, never really expected to be able to get married. In California, they could, and they did. The ones who did were very happy. The ones who didn't are really, really pissed. Much as I am sorry for outcome, I am glad that the fight is alive and well.