Given the passage of California Proposition 8 which attempts to add an amendment in the state constitution to ban marriage among same-sex couples, there’s been a lot of finger pointing at who’s to blame. Given the statistics that have been published saying that 7 out of 10 blacks voted for it, and that other people of color, including Latinos and Asians were split evenly, one of the most obvious scapegoats have been people of color. What’s been most disconcerting for me personally is seeing how many Asians who were organizing against Prop 8 have bought into this excuse, using phrases like, “Why would they vote for discrimination if they’ve been discriminated against themselves?” to using racial slurs, which don’t deserve repeating. Never mind that whites in the more conservative parts of California, such as the Central Valley, the Inland Empire and the Redwood Empire, overwhelmingly voted for Prop 8, which constitute the vast majority of the population in these areas.
The organizers of No on 8 needed to take a page from those who supported the proposition, reaching out to people of color. No on 8 focused almost exclusively in the white populations in the big California cities, San Francisco and Los Angeles, while blatantly ignoring that Latinos are the majority in Los Angeles County. The Yes on 8 campaign had rented space in Asian language newspapers for weeks before the No on 8 even attempted to outreach to the Asian community. The No on 8 campaign did very little organizing in the more conservative parts of California, even failing to come to support a Catholic priest in Fresno who was under fire for both coming out and voicing his opposition to Prop 8. The only concerted effort to the black community came from the cast of Noah’s Arc who did events against Prop 8 in combination with the release of their film. It was up to small, poorly funded organizations to do the outreach to communities of color, such as Asian Equality, which should be commended for being able to do rallies and outreach in the Asian American community with extremely limited resources.
It wasn’t until yesterday that finally a press release came from the executive directors of the four main nonprofits who spearheaded the No on 8 campaign urging people to stop blaming people of color and others:
We achieve nothing if we isolate the people who did not stand with us in this fight. We only further divide our state if we attempt to blame people of faith, African American voters, rural communities and others for this loss. We know people of all faiths, races and backgrounds stand with us in our fight to end discrimination, and will continue to do so. Now more than ever it is critical that we work together and respect our differences that make us a diverse and unique society. Only with that understanding will we achieve justice and equality for all.
Funny how these groups didn’t even mention a single recognized group that actually catered to these constituencies — nor did they talk about how they are actively trying to do more outreach so that it doesn’t happen again.
The vast majority of the blame for passing Prop 8 rests on the executive directors of these organizations who failed to do outreach to groups, especially people of color including Asian Americans, that prove integral to the vote in California. Their laziness, complacency and lack of understanding the basic demographics of the state led to their defeat; their inability to understand the national implications of this passing and their inability to do any substantial fund raising outside of California, even as the Mormons infamously raised millions of dollars nationwide for Yes on 8, is extremely telling.
It’s time for the white LGBT community and those who are in support of same-sex marriage in the big cities to recognize that there were obviously missed opportunities to establish and create coalitions of like minded people across race and ethnicity, religion, class, and region; and that these coalitions need to be established and nurtured, NOW. As these groups support same-sex marriage and rights for LGBTs, these groups also need to show sincere support for struggles in communities of color such as immigration, worker’s rights, etc. By failing to recognize that this continues to be a nationwide struggle that crosses all these communities, any attempts to restrict the rights of LGBTs in California will be successful unless these groups get their shit together and start doing outreach to ALL of us.
(Flickr photo credit: bobster1985)
What next?
Other posts you may be interested in:
- Reaching the Chinese-American & Taiwanese-American community to vote NO on Prop 8 in California
- Jackie Speier announces run for Congress
- Asian Americans, Thank God, Soundly Against California Prop 8
- George Takei is getting married!
- What is “Marriage Protection”? A Social Conservative’s View on Prop 8
Recent Comments
- ABC’s Modern Family: “I’m from Denver.”
- Jae Young: I love how when I told my coworkers that it enrages me when people ask “Where are you from?”...
- Rachel Lee: Asian Teens Behaving Badly
- Asians Behaving Badly: Japanese American Woman Sues Because Crunch Berries Aren’t Real Berries
- Jake: Nips? Flipz? How about someone take one for the team and sue those racist confectioners for products that...
- Newsflash: Some Asian Men Cheat on their Partners
- Hip Hip Hooray for MVP Hideki Matsui
- Simon Tsui: Hip hip hurry for Hideki Matsui! A lot of people question whether someone else deserved being MVP,...
15 Comments to “No on 8: How NOT to Run an Initiative Campaign”
Ernie wrote:
Here’s a different perspective that I’m more inclined to agree on:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/prop-8-myths.html
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 12:13 pm | Permalink
Mike wrote:
From my impression, most of the protesting has been done towards churches after Prop 8 passed. This is the first time, I’ve heard someone blaming the minorities. Though I think it would be quite not PC if we see a bunch of white LGBT protesting in front of a Hispanic or African-American Church. It would look like the Democratic party has infighting of their own.
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 1:25 pm | Permalink
Dennis wrote:
Mike, I wish you were right, but some people’s first reaction was to blame blacks.
http://rodonline.typepad.com/rodonline/2008/11/n-word-and-raci.html
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 2:17 pm | Permalink
Efren wrote:
Ernie, I think that’s definitely true too, but just from what I’ve seen, the vitriol on blacks and other people of color who voted for Prop 8 is a lot more than what I saw against older people–since most people are thinking, “oh, they’ll just die off anyway”, which doesn’t really help things either.
The churches were the ones that were targeted most because they are the best organized, but those protests seem pointless to me since their beliefs on sexuality are entrenched and unlikely to change. Besides, the churches would be more willing to listen if people within the churches were protesting–anyone else protesting would have very little, if any, impact.
My whole point of the post is to point out that the people who were leading the drive on No on 8 could’ve done a much better job, simply by just doing more outreaching than they did. As it was, what pissed me off the most was the complacency and the assumption by people of No on 8 that they assumed that if whites in SF and LA voted against it, that it would be enough to reject it. Clearly, this is not true–that assumption wasn’t true when the first gay marriage ban was voted a few years ago, it’s not true now, and seeing how California’s becoming increasingly minority majority, it will never be true.
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 2:48 pm | Permalink
Rona_fernandez9@yaho wrote:
I couldn’t agree with you more, Efren, on all of your points. I did some phonebanking for the No on 8 campaign with my husband and a friend. We were the ONLY people of color in the room of over 50 activists. And this was in BERKELEY. It boggled my mind, but it also didn’t surprise me. I agree wholeheartedly, as someone with a background in community organizing, that the Yes on 8 campaign ran a better operation on many levels (doesn’t mean, of course, that i agree with their position at all, just saying that they were more strategic and honestly, less biased about who to reach out to to win). I don’t know why the No on 8 side felt like they didn’t need to do targeted and agressive outreach in communities of color–they could’ve won just catering to Latinos. I actually talked to an immigrant Latino voter when I did phonebanking, who was undecided until I told him that the measure was discriminatory, and then he became an enthusiastic “No” voter, saying he would tell all his friends to vote no as well. Goes to show what a little communication can do. It’s not like people of color are stupid!
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 3:37 pm | Permalink
jozjozjoz wrote:
Hey! I know the Asian guy in that picture!
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 4:55 pm | Permalink
encyclops wrote:
What happened when minority LGBT activist groups approached the (presumably white) organizers of the (presumably monolithic) No on 8 campaign and expressed the need for outreach campaigns and materials that addressed people of color specially and specifically?
I mean, I’m sure those groups were not just sitting around waiting for someone to ask them for their perspective and assistance. I’m sure they must have tried to get involved but were ignored and turned away as irrelevant, right? I’m just curious how this actually went down.
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 5:26 pm | Permalink
John wrote:
@Efren & @Rona_fernandez9 – Asian Americans in particular are very apathetic when it comes to civic engagement and involvement… something I have blogged about often in my posts… and why I try to go to the other extreme ….
@Ernie – http://www.fivethirtyeight.com rocks! One of the many sites I followed during the election season…
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 9:40 pm | Permalink
Jen wrote:
I saw this on the Colbert report, where Dan Savage is intereviewed… he seems to think it’s a generational thing too, not a minority thing:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/210299/november-11-2008/proposition-8-protests—dan-savage
Hilarious clip too since Dan Savage makes Colbert crack up!
Posted on 12-Nov-08 at 9:53 pm | Permalink
Toro wrote:
by Ragan Fox:
Claims that Gay liberation and the civil rights movement are analogous is a “slap in the face” to black people are false. Pointing out obvious likenesses between the two social movements is not the same as saying the movements are the same.
Another false claim: gay marriage is not a civil rights issue. For the record, rightfully categorizing gay marriage as a civil right is not the same as saying gay marriage is the civil rights movement. Civil rights refer to protection against public (government) and or private sector discrimination. Period. One more time: civil rights are not exclusively tied to the U.S. Civil Rights Movement. Civil rights are not the exclusive purview of black America.
Finally to suggest gay marriage is a top priority of white, elitist gay men is WRONG. The marriage debate’s exigence was created by religious and state organizations preemptively legislating anti-gay discrimination. This fact is the bittersweet irony of the gay marriage debate. Homophobes put the issue on gay radar. When the US Supreme Court overturned sodomy bans, I distinctly remember religious leaders suggesting gay marriage would be the next “battle.” Gay people, across the board, have been cornered into the gay marriage debate. Keep in mind, gay marriage is incommensurable with the goals of radical feminism and the queer movement. Several people who identify as “queer” have had to rethink their stance on identity politics because of all this.
addtionally from NPR:
Another poll by the Center for the Study of L.A. found in Los Angeles, just over half of blacks supported Prop 8. Fernando Guerra directs the center at Loyola Marymount University. He told KPCC’s Larry Mantle that he doubts black opposition to the measure was as large as has been reported.
Fernando Guerra: Seventeen-and-a-half percent of all blacks in state of California live and vote in city of L.A. – so neither one of ours could be correct because for us to get only 52 percent – and statewide 70 percent, all blacks outside the city of Los Angeles would have had to support that proposition by 75 percent, so it makes it even higher.”
Posted on 13-Nov-08 at 11:51 pm | Permalink
deewu wrote:
@Jen: Savage initially thought race was the primary factor based on a CNN poll.
Posted on 14-Nov-08 at 12:23 pm | Permalink
Efren wrote:
Toro: I see your points–but my question to you is–so what?
The issue of same-sex marriage was forced upon us by the far right–but then again, it seems that people who are fighting for same-sex marriage appear to be used to having the far right drive the debate, when it should be us who’s forcing the issues that need to be raised. That’s been a major problem–with a lack of clear leadership, those who are organized will speak for us. Personally, I’m sick of people who are for queer rights who just react–instead of act.
So recognizing that, what does that mean? It’s not like we can just pull ourselves out of this issue. It has to be fought to its logical conclusion–whatever that means.
Personally, I find it disconcerting that in the drive for same-sex marriage in California that other more basic rights are not protected for queers. Same-sex marriage is all well and good, but if I can still be fired from my job for having a same-sex partner or looking like the “wrong” gender; if my kids can be harrassed by fellow students and administrators without any sort of state protection because they’re perceived to be queer; if my elders have to hide their orientation or gender presentation in an elder care home for fear of discrimination, then what’s the point?
Personally, I feel that a government-sanctioned couple should be completely independent of marriage. It honestly feels for me that for many conservatives, the issue is one of semantics–while many of them were howling about the use of “gay marriage”, they were also quietly pushing for the strongest civil union partnerships in the US before same-sex marriage happened in Massachusetts.
Posted on 15-Nov-08 at 12:34 am | Permalink
Toro wrote:
Efren: Civil unions versus marriage is not a debate of semantics. I’m sure you are smart enough for me not to cite all the reasons here.
Posted on 15-Nov-08 at 9:08 pm | Permalink
Efren wrote:
Toro: Clearly, I don’t need this, but I think it would be good to see how it isn’t. Civil union–as it’s described now–clearly isn’t marriage, but at the same time, maybe what needs to happen is that they be made separate–marriage simply being sanctioned by one’s religionwith no governmental benefits; civil unions representing the social and governmental contract that happens when two people decide to enter a union.
I am very curious why you didn’t respond to the rest of my reply–are you in agreement?
Posted on 15-Nov-08 at 10:23 pm | Permalink
Toro wrote:
Efren, I’m not really sure what you’re asking re: the first part of your comments. Could you restate your question for me please.
Posted on 16-Nov-08 at 10:23 am | Permalink
Post a Comment