That would be Sinaijon:
I don’t know that Sinaijon agrees with that view, but he has advanced it as an explanation for the attitudes of others in this debate.
You’re mistaking “We are both struggling for equal rights, so why can’t you support me in mine?” with “My struggle is the same, and is just as bad as yours.” Not the same thing.
I think questioning why people who have suffered inequality in the recent past vote to oppress others is a worthwhile question to ask, and isn’t whiny per se.
I don’t think anyone’s trying to sway you. The topic of the thread is, why don’t black people (as an overall demographic group) feel any kinship with the civil rights struggles of gays? There is no propagandizing or attempts to win anyone over. It’s asking for an examination of people’s reasoning. That’s what’s being discussed. I don’t see the need for comparing who’s more oppressed, nor calling anyone a whiner.
I’m sorry, that was my understanding of the statements I quoted. Again:
How does calling gays and lesbians “rich kids” who are whining that they “can’t use the Ferrari for the weekend” not come out to saying they’ve had an easy ride and their complaints are unfounded in reality?
No, you can not make a 1 to 1 comparison of race-based civil rights struggles in this country and orientation-based civil rights struggles. Gays were not enslaved for being gays. Black have had the right to marry for far longer and and on a much wider basis. Some gay people can closet themselves in cases where to do otherwise would result in danger to themselves. Black people are seldom kicked out of their families for being black. But both groups (and they are not altogether separate, obviously - there are gay and lesbian people of all races, and gays and lesbians have worked as hard as anyone for race-based civil rights) have struggled and are working to be granted their civil rights. There is enough parallel in experiences to not throw the comparison out completely or play “who gets shit on more”.
Reread what I wrote. The focus on the “For them” that you quoted from Sinaijon.
Yes. You asked who had put forward the proposition. Sinaijon has put it forward. Even if he doesn’t endorse it personally, he has presented the argument for discussion in this thread.
You would (probably) assume wrong; unless they were Muslims, then you would (probably) assume correct.
So, your issue with what I wrote is only that no one in this thread can specifically be pointed out as supporting the idea that gays and lesbians have had an easy ride? For the record, I was responding to the idea itself, as proposed by Sinaijon as something thought by some black people, regarding the comparison between the black civil rights struggle and the gay civil rights struggle. Not to Sinaijon individually.
A big factor in the sympathetic tendencies of early feminists is that many of the most influential American feminists emerged politically while fighting for the abolition of slavery. Of course, they also ended up feeling slighted once the 14th and 15th amendments passed because to them it elevated blacks above women.
As puzzling as it is to me too, I have always felt that this argument gives majority whites a free pass to be bigots. Effectively this whole thread is saying that its understandable for straight whites to hate gays but not us (blacks). However, I do find the inability of the black community to accept gay marriage very frustrating.
I think the point that you are responding to above was not that blacks tend to have patriarchal communities but rather that masculinity in men is highly (sometimes over) valued. Women are truly the center of the family but there is a lot of importance place on “manning up” if you are a black male. Adults continually reinforce the importance of young boys growing up to be strong and powerful black men. As a result, any femininity in black males is seen as weakness and undermining the strength of the community.
This conversation seems to be focusing on religion as a major factor but it really is not as key as some would think. If I recorded the reasons that I have been given by my black friends and family members, who oppose gay marriage, less than 5% cite religion. Most say that they do not want that lifestyle “in their face”. That is why the whole “down low” thing is so prevalent and actually accepted. Within the family, people generally ignore the fact that there is a gay cousin/aunt/uncle. I have seen partners come to all sorts of major and minor family events with almost no reaction. I cannot say the same for family members who bring white significant others to family gatherings.
IIRC Jews were some of the first white people standing side-by-side with blacks in the black civil rights struggles. That makes it all the more appalling to see some of the antisemitic views some black leaders espouse.
Of course Jews and Palestinians are in a struggle with each other so that is a whole other thing.
Overall it seems inconsistent. Not sure why one group will be viewed with sympathy as another enduring a difficult struggle and another group is dismissed.
It was actually an argument presented by one of the ministers interviewed for the story linked in the OP, if you’d care to read it.
And to further clarify, it’s not about being easy in absolute terms, which you seemed to be implying. It’s about being easy comparatively.
I think gay activists do their cause a disservice by comparing it to the struggle of the blacks for civil rights. Blacks were treated as property, considered subhuman, even animals. The position these people were in just beggars belief. That’s a whole universe away from not being able to express one’s sexuality openly.
And not just whites, but Latinos, Asians, women, and others groups who have faced discrimination and should, just like blacks, be able to empathize with gays.
Latinos currently outnumber blacks, and are struggling with many social justice issues (immigration comes to mind), but for some reason it garners little surprise that as a group they aren’t strong advocates for SSM. Why is that?
Just like blacks seem to get a disproportionate attention in the Affirmative Action debate so too do they seem to get disproportionate attention in the gay debate. It is really weird to me.
Latinos support gay marriage at the same rates as whites. As you can see from the charts, blacks oppose gay marriage at might higher rates than either whites or Latinos. So there goes that argument.
Probably because their antagonism to gay rights is disproportionate to society’s overall.
Said it before, and I’ll say it again. There’s nothing an oppressed group is happier to jump on than another oppressed group that is even farther down the totem pole.
-Joe
I know I assumed wrong, and I even know what the response would be. “But it’s different!”
Not that it can’t happen here. Not all that long ago a great-aunt had to hide the fact that she was Jewish in order to get a job - in the middle of New York City too.
Zoe, I came up with a theory similar to Argent Towers (without the edumacated reading), also adding that the number of women black man try to “get” and well as the babies they create and leave behind as part of their virility and manhood, illustrating the macho attitude AT described so well.
Actually, although he did not directly mention women in his description, their role in and perpetuation of this machismo fits in very nicely with his description. Whether true or not, this manly attitude seeks to protect black womanhood (or tries to believe that they do) because they are so superstrong. Have you never heard of those men always running around speaking of black woman as their queen, etc.?
And, yes, many times black woman are the ones raising who raise the children, get the education and hold down steady employment (although for more complex reasons than fit in here), but you better believe they’re teaching the sons there is no worse thing to be than weak, a punk and, worse, a sissy or a faggot.*
None of this is one hundred percent true for every black man or woman (nor is any description) but it certainly makes some sense.
- I was once denounced a faggot by a two-year-old boy because, after I was asked to play basketball to fill in on an urban court, it became obvious I couldn’t cut it. Where’d he get that from?
A “burner” is a participant in the annual Burningman festival near Reno NV. It is an all media art festival, and many people do their art in the form of costumes - mostly brightly colored, often lit up with LEDs - and since it is such an open community, very few people have hang-ups abut sexuality, so guys don’t have to worry that they will be ostracized because they wear a dress, or colorful costumes, or big bright pink afro wigs, etc. This is not to say all or even most hetero burner guys do this, but it is common. Also, the fags that attend BM tend to be more hetero looking and acting than your stereotypical Castro street queen.
Most boys who are molested are molested by men, not women, so a hetero man who has been molested has had a same-sex experience that was not good, and I can see where many people in that place will generalize to all gay men. It is an ignorant POV, but not unreasonable given that experience. Molestation fucks with a child’s sexuality in many insidious ways, and one thing it can do is make a hetero/slightly bi guy very insecure about his sexuality, and insecurity breeds contempt.
I can’t believe I just read this and have no idea how to respond… what a horrible metaphor! You think us homos are otherwise privileged!!! Yeah, I remember all the perks I get… lets see… I get, Um…
Thinking…
Thinking…
No, nothing yet… what are these wonderful advantages that compare to being a rich kid, and make it OK that I can be discriminated against and made a second class citizen in my home state?
There is other data that show significant disparities between Latinos and whites when it comes to this topic, so I wouldn’t be so confident that blacks aren’t overtargeted in this issue.
And although more women than men support SSM, with more than half against legalized gay marriage, I don’t see how they or any other group who has suffered discrimination has room to judge any other one. Gay acceptance is a national problem, not just a black one.
I’m not denying that stats show blacks are anti-SSM and are particularly more anti that others…I just take issue with the “how can they be so hypocritical” lament that people like to apply to blacks as if it most everyone else has embraced gays except them.
-
many men just look and act “gay” - even a few who are very hetero, so they can’t, or at least have a very hard time, “covering”. Those guys usually just get used to being beat up in high school and learn to run fast.
-
This is a two edged sword: Guys that don’t scream “Queer” at the top of their actions don’t get noticed as gay - My father, a somewhat racist person, was polite enough to stop the race jokes when a black person came into the room. I don’t get that minimal level of respect, because I walk in and no one knows I am gay until I tell them (largely just to avoid that exact problem). I get to hear and see what people say when they think there are no gay people in the room. Also, for people that do try to stay on the down-low, there is the constant threat of exposure by a hateful person, and for many people that can affect their career in unfair ways.
Sorry for a bunch of posts in a row, but there were over 50 posts since I looked last night, so much to respond to!