By Kheven LaGrone 

Watching the LOGO/Human Rights Commission (HRC) presented Democratic candidates debate on LOGO on August 9, an outsider might see a diverse but united gay community.  There were four panelists—one white man, two white women and one Black man.  The cameras broadcasted many people of color in the audience. A couple of the presidential candidates were even asked questions about Black gay men.   

It is vital that the white gay movement present a multi-racial, non-discriminating
front—regardless of gay America’s race reality.    How could the white gay movement demand equality if white gay communities discriminated?  If the white gay movement marginalizes its people of color, then why shouldn’t mainstream America marginalize white gays?

By Kheven LaGrone

Depending on how you looked at Proposition 8, the proposition either protected traditional marriage and family or banned gay marriage. “No On 8” activists argued that the proposition promoted hate and discrimination. However, before the election, I could hear the beginning of a “Yes on 8” backlash on talk radio here in the San Francisco Bay Area. I listened to the “No On 8” movement imploding and riling the backlash.


 

On November 4, 42 of California’s 58 counties voted to support Proposition 8. The state’s five largest counties supported it. What happened? Initially, many voters seemed to not have cared one way or another about gay marriage—and they certainly didn’t care enough to vote against it. However, the video clip of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s angry rant that gay marriage was coming “whether they like it or not” surely agitated some people into action to support Proposit ion 8. The clip got a lot of attention. Push people and people push back. One man called in to a talk radio show and said that when he saw all the, to use his word, “wackos,” fighting against Proposition 8, he assumed it was a proposition that he should support. Some supporters of Proposition 8 were concerned that gay marriage would be promoted in schools. Opponents of the proposition argued that it wouldn’t. However, when school leaders joined in the fray to f ight Proposition 8, the question arose: If they’re not going to teach gay marriage in the schools, why are these teacher leaders getting so involved? To prove their argument that gay marriage would be taught in the schools, Prop 8 supporters highlighted the true story about the elementary school teacher who brought her class to her lesbian wedding.
Some opponents of Proposition 8 pointed at a high divorce rate and the “failure” of heterosexual marriages. The reaction was not one of defeating Prop 8. Instead, protectors of marriage saw the rising divorce rate as a call to “rescue” the institution of traditional marriage.
Proposition 8 was compared to legalized racial oppression. Surely, the opponents reasoned, if we are against oppression based on race, we have to be against oppression overall—and, using this argument, African American voters would have to vote against Proposition 8. However, many African Americans do not accept that a white man’s CHOOSING to live an openly gay lifestyle faces the same discrimination that a conservative, middle class churchgoing African American man might. One must factor in the power of choice into the equation.

Please continue to Full Story