Separate but sequel
No love for seven out of 10 black voters in California
By Edwin Decker
Like most of the world, I was overwhelmed with emotion last Tuesday night when the people of the United States elected Barack Obama for president.
Wow! How’s that for poetic irony. Just when we thought we were helplessly enslaved by an administration of nearly insane, power-starved, mostly-white, science-rejecting megalomaniacs, in walks a smart-talking, free-thinking black man to emancipate us.
Also, I have been taking extra pleasure in pondering all those hardcore racists out there who must be quite aghast as they watch black people on TV dancing in the streets and sobbing tears of joy. In my fantasy, I imagine some skinhead knucklehead pacing in his living room, muttering racial epithets to himself. Perhaps there is a shotgun in his closet, perhaps he will put the shotgun in his mouth. This is my fantasy, so it ends my way.
Yes, Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2008, was a day when you truly felt proud to be an American. But then, on Nov. 5, I read something that changed all that.
I read that California’s black voters favored Proposition 8 by a margin of 70 percent to 30 percent, which means seven out of 10 black voters voted against gay marriage, which means seven out of 10 black voters suck major ass.
And yes, I’m quite certain some of you are going to call me a bigot for saying so, but I don’t care because that would just be the black calling the kettle black. I mean, I knew African-Americans leaned toward a homophobic mindset, what with all the Bible thumping and gospel singing, but 70-30? In California!? I had no idea it would be so lopsided.
And because Prop. 8 passed by only a 5-percent margin, and given that black voters came out in droves for this historic election, it probably means those 70-percenters were the determining factor in 8’s passage.
That is disappointing on so many levels.
Because, now, when I watch the news and see a black commentator on some talk show holding back the tears and talking ’bout, “We’ve come a long way, baby,” I can’t help but wonder if that person is one of the 70-percenters. I can’t help but think, Hey, man, was it you who had the audacity to vote yes on Proposition Hate? How could you!? How, after all these decades of demanding equality, can you then turn around and deny it to those who are next in line? Even President-elect Obama is against gay marriage, which breaks my heart. In his defense, though, he did say he was pro-civil unions (that grant equal protections), which is cool, I guess, but not the reality. Domestic partnerships are not the same as marriage. Not in California, anyway. They are sorely lacking certain important provisions such as inheritance, adoptive and visitation rights. But, even if domestic partnerships were to become legally identical to marriage, well, it still isn’t right. That’d be like saying, “OK, look, you are not permitted to drink from the white water fountain, but don’t worry because we believe in equality, too, so we made the black water fountain exactly the same as the white one. Is that cool? Cool.”
In other words, it’s Separate but Equal: The Sequel.
So, sorry—no, not cool. Everyone drinks from the same goddamn fountain. That’s the rule. That’s what the Constitution says. That’s the $64,000 answer to a motherfucking 10-cent question. Or did I read the Declaration of Independence wrong? Let me check. Oh look, see, turns out I did read it wrong. I missed the parenthetical remarks:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men (who are not queer) are created equal, and endowed with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and pursuit of Happiness (except queers, silly, what were you thinking?).”
Yeah, right, silly me.
Anyway, I’d like to finish the column the same way it began, with a bit of irony, though this time considerably less poetic.
The constitutional principles that should have rejected a ban on gay marriage in 2008 are the same principles that rejected bans on interracial marriage in 1967. Before then, anti-miscegenation (also called “racial integrity”) laws were still on the books in many states. Thankfully, Hawaii was not one of them. But if it were, if the Hawaii courts and the Hawaii populace had not rejected these medieval bans on interracial sexual contact, well, there would probably be no such thing as a Barack Obama, himself the son of a black man and a white woman. Or, if his parents lived in Alabama, Mississippi or any of the other 16 states that deploringly held on to their racial-integrity laws till the bitter end, well, he probably wouldn’t be alive because it would’ve been illegal for his parents to marry and make babies.
And all those homosexuals who have been supporting the black civil-rights movement since the ’60s (and support they most certainly did!) unknowingly shot themselves in the foot by helping clear a path for a black presidential candidate in 2008, which attracted more African-Americans to the polls than ever, and they then overwhelmingly voted yes on Prop. Hate, thereby keeping bigotry alive in well in America.
So to all you 70-Percenters out there—spare me the tears. You haven’t come a long way, baby; you’re right back where you started from, at the front lines of oppression. The only difference is that now you’re the oppressor instead of the oppressed. You are voluntarily pissing on the grave of Martin Luther King Jr. You’re a hypocrite and a sellout. I beg of you, 70-Percenters, change your minds and hearts now. Godspeed.
P.S. To all you 30-Percenters out there, way to go. Much respect. Out.
Write to ed@sdcitybeat.com. For more, visit www.edwindecker.com.
Published: 11/11/2008
DIGG | del.icio.us | REDDIT
Other Stories by Edwin Decker
Related Articles
Comments
There's also a great deal of fear in the black community of homosexuality -- and black pastors stir those flames of hate consistently. Case in point, I had a conversation with one sista who feared that "she might not be let through the gates" of heaven if she voted no on Prop. 8. I can see St. Peter meeting her at the gates, informing her that she lived an otherwise good life -- except for voting on the "Satanic" proposition. "To hell you go, girlfriend."
Man, I know some black folk that go to churches with black choir leaders, go to salons with gay hairdressers, etc. -- but then will later talk down on gays all day. There's also unspoken movement to protect this pop cultural ideal of black masculinity -- an image that portends black men must be: 1. Physically strong and athletic (translation: a buck). 2. Virile. 3. God-fearing and of course 3. Straight. If you asked many young blacks today about the first image that comes to mind when they think about black masculinity, many would probably land somewhere between Tupac and 50 Cent, rather than James Baldwin. A lot of that is due to programming, courtesy of mainstream media and the Christian Crutch (oops, I meant church).
And don't even get me started about brothas on the "down low." A lot of these pastors who tell their members to vote No on 8 lead double lives that would be fodder for E. Lynn Harris' next best seller. And why do you think there are so many sistas coming down with HIV? It's because their husbands and lovers are "gay for the stay" while behind bars -- but straight as a ruler when they get of the pen.
Anyways, the silence of black leaders and church pastors on issues related to homosexuality has been biting our community in the ass for a long time. The level of support for Prop. 8 in the black community is another example of black people trying to run away from the issue, as opposed to having an honest and frank discussion about the lives that many of their brothas and sistas lead. Even though the issue is not going away.
Now that our anger and depression over Prop 8 has subsided, we need to commit to re-framing marriage equality from a religious issue to a civil rights issue, particularly in communities that voted against us. As a long-time activist/supporter of civil rights I have to admit to initial feelings of betrayal by the African-American community's vote. But then I started to recall the early civil rights movement and how much of that was helping people to re-think their position on race. We will succeed if we see the 70% who voted against our equality as potential supporters whom we can bring over to our side but this must be done peacefully and lovingly.
Hey buddy, Bill O'Reilly tried that one too. The math is flawed. First, the often cited 70 percent is a figure based on a single CNN exit poll of a small amount of voters. Second, as of a 2006 estimate based on prior census data, African Americans are only 6.2 percent of the California population. That is all African Americans, not just registered voters, so a substantial portion of them are not of voting age and an additional portion as you know, may have lost their ability to vote due to incarceration or felony conviction (at last count, this was approximately 115,000 African Americans in California.)
Carrying just that basic math forward, and adding in the fact that not all of that population showed up to vote, you are talking about an alleged 70 percent of less than 4 percent of the population. Let's just say that makes 2.8 percent of the population. Now I am not a math guy, but after adding it all up, I think you will find that the total African American votes on Prop 8 yay or nay adds up to less than the total margin of passage (approx 500,000).
Villify the real culprit-- a system that allows a voting majority to take civil rights away from a minority. This crap should never be put to a voe.
Just looking out for you -- Cecil
I hear and read a lot of rhetoric about the passage of Prop 8 but little or nothing is said about any solutions to the matter. It appears that a majority has its solution in the Yes on 8 passage of this Proposition. Finger pointing solves nothing and it appears dialogue means nothing to a made up mind. I live by the creed that Discrimination of any kind is wrong. I don't preach it and I don't practice it and yes I have been the receiver of discrimination and it was wrong then and it is wrong now. I voted NO on Prop 8 and I am at peace with myself. However anyone else voted is on them.
Oh, and by the way, "Man will not be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." --Louisa May Alcott
Obama also said that, although he believes marriage is between a man and a woman, he opposed Prop 8.
I also wonder if there are any religions out there that encourage their flock to vote against civil rights legislation because of the Cain and Abel story and the Ham story.
Cecil, I was concerned about the math also, which is why I chose the word "probably" when I said that the African American vote was "probably the determining factor."
But that doesn't matter, however many blacks who voted YES on Prop 8 are the blacks to whom I was speaking. I hope there IS a Hell so they can rot there.
Which does not mean I don't also blame the Mormon's, or the Christian right and every person who voted yes, and a system that allows the majority to get over on the minority - I blame all those people too, but I just felt a special pang of disappointment toward the so-called (by me) 70 percenters considering the civil right struggle they had just been through and their exuberance over a black President being elected. It was all too much.
Anyway, thanks all for dropping by and speaking your mind. By the way, there is more discussion about this matter over at my website as well.
hey edwin, the truth hurts.
black people do not condone homosexuality.
collectively, never have.. never will.
neither does america or california..
for that matter, contrary to what the "liberal media" wants everyone to think.
blame god.
the people have spoken.
black people and homosexuals have nothing in common so why would we vote to support you?
we (as in black people) are SICK of hearing homosexuals bring up "the civil rights struggle".
your so called struggle is nothing like what black people continue to deal with, so let it go.
your continued whining, marching and protesting is only agitating the masses and turning public sentiment further against your "no on 8" side.
theres a reason you guys are only protesting in front of mormon temples and not black churches and it has nothing to do with who funded the yes on 8 campaign..............
MAKE THE CUT, you couldn't be more wrong.
It's got nothing to do with fear, which is what you're implying. Protesters aren't afraid of blacks. They're not even thinking about blacks.
It's got everything to do with getting media attention.
The protesters know that it's not newsworthy to protest in front of black churches because, except for maybe the Voice and Viewpoint, the media won't show up because black churches are not considered a strong social force in San Diego. Hell, are there even that many black churches here? I can think of Bayview Baptist and Bethel AME, and that's it. What do you think is going to get 10 News and KUSI to drive their vans out to the protest - a giant temple in La Jolla, or a storefront crackerjack box on Imperial Avenue?
You're also wrong in that it's exactly the same struggle. I'm no bourgeois liberal, either - I'm a straight, white, Southern Baptist son of a sharecropper from Paradise Hills who worked at Morse High School for 14 years. The news media wouldn't lower itself to cover stories in my neighborhood unless it had to do with reinforcing the stereotype that we were all criminals.
Poppa.
i didnt mean just in san diego.. i meant ANYWHERE.
everyone knows theres are no black people in san diego..
cmon, do you really think gay people would willingly march in south east san diego...against black people?
hahah that would be awesome to see.
theres no backlash when you rage on mormons,
no one likes them anyway.
the news doesnt cover stories out there because no one at all cares about south east besides the people puttin in work on their enemies.
and obviously that doesnt fit in with what san diego is good at doing:gouging tourists year round.
the obama loving left and their loyal media lap dogs like cnn and mslgbt were truly thrown for a loop on this whole 70/30 thing. thats why its so hilarious..
watchin keith olbermann cry... epic win.
the 30% = black guys who hang out with a lot of white people (i.e. black star wars fan guy) & the gay black guys
the 70% = those normal down to earth, good natured, racist black people you love to encounter everyday
the no on 8 crowd are like "hey, we voted for a black guy for president and this is the thanks we get?"
and black people are looking at that crowd like
lol wut
stfu
gtfo.
MAKE THE CUT, there are hardly any black people in California, much less San Diego. There are pockets (e.g. South Central LA, urban Oakland), but that's it. California's African American population is less than 7%, which we all know is not enough to sway an election one way or the other in and of itself.
I'd also have to disagree in part with your assessment of the 70%. It may be partially true, but I've been neighbors with, worked with, and taught many African Americans who, although they hold no special love for Whitey, would not and did not vote yes on Prop 8 because it smacked to them of Jim Crow. I know black people from ages 15 to 70 who say this, and these aren't milquetoast types, either.
It's inaccurate to portray any culture as monolithic. Prop 8 won due to a combination of factors - the Black Vote being merely one, and a minor one at that.
Regardless, let's look at the numbers, using the info provided in these posts (I'll trust their accuracty). Let's round up for easy math purposes.
California has about 40 million people.
About 7% of those are African American, so there are fewer than 3 million black people in California.
Voter turnout statewide was around 80%. That makes 2.4 million.
Subtract those not eligible to vote because they're under 18, which is about 20% of the population. That leaves under 2 million.
Subtract convicted felons who've lost their voting rights, and it's probably closer to 1.5 million.
70% of 1.5 million is just over 1 million.
For Prop 8 to have lost because of the Black Vote, it would have had to lose by about a million votes and every other eligible voter in the state would have had to vote no on it.
I think people, African American and otherwise, are grossly overestimating the black role in defeating Prop 8.
Latinos, on the other hand, are the second-largest group in California, and will soon be the largest. They're already the largest among people 18 and younger.
Of course, this isn't about the role African Americans played. It's about African American hypocrisy, which is Decker's point. The point remains valid regardless of all other claims.
"...the 70% = those normal down to earth, good natured, racist black people you love to encounter everyday..."
How sad.
Not even sure where to begin with talking this guy back from the ledge of hatred. Maybe he'll just fall off into the abyss below?
What's sadder is that there's some truth in what he says.
Hey Ed,
I am one of those "30 percenters" that voted "No on 8."
I don't totally buy the 70/30 statistics, because no one is really keeping a tally on the race of each individual person who voted. Mace Windu didn't give his race when he registered to vote, and he didn't mark his race on the ballot when he voted absentee.
Still, don't get me started on the hypocrisy of black people and homosexuality.
A lot of black folks did voted Yes on 8 for the same reason that a lot of Hispanics supported Prop. 8. Blind allegiance to religion and the so-called Christian church. The church is probably the most influential entity in the black community (minus rap videos, crack cocaine and the 40 ounce). There's a gargantuan "sheep" factor at work, when it comes to how blacks shape their social-political world view. Until blacks wake up and realize that their pastor is pimping them, along with BET, the San Diego Voice and Viewpoint, etc., you can expect nothing more than more "asleep at the wheel" type voting patterns from blacks, like we've seen with Prop. 8.