www.newsandletters.org
|
|
NEWS & LETTERS, May 2004African-American gays on marriage, assimilationMemphis, Tenn.--I’ve never been a fan of THE ADVOCATE. It perpetuates the stereotype that all homosexuals are shallow, pro-corporate, bubble-gum, upper middle class, and white. The first article I read in THE ADVOCATE was about gay marriage. In true ADVOCATE style, the article said nothing, but the accompanying picture said it all. The picture featured a gay male couple, obviously well off, well groomed, color coordinated, and, of course, white; matching Gaybies strapped to their tummies, kissing after engaging in the Bonds of Matrimony. The All-American couple. This picture exemplifies a growing schism in the gay community between the assimilationists, who want to integrate into "mainstream" (read: white middle-class heterosexual) American society at all costs, and the liberationists, who want to facilitate and maintain a distinct gay cultural identity. How can our self-appointed gay leaders tout same sex marriage and ignore issues that are far more pressing? While gay marriage will benefit gay couples, it will not help the single gay who is about to be thrown out of his home because he is too sick to work. It will not help the single lesbian who is suffering from breast cancer and cannot undergo chemotherapy or buy medication because she has no insurance. It won’t help the homeless gay youth who was thrown out on the streets because his father found out that she was gay. As a member of two minority groups, it is difficult for me to support an individual or group that supports one part of my being and castigates the other. I cannot support a Black group that discriminates against homosexuals, nor could I support a homosexual organization that discriminates against persons of color. It bothers me that gay activists can beatify Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, and ignore the havoc he’s wreaked on the poor and persons of color. Newsom came to power last year by appealing to the racism, self-hatred, and classism of San Francisco’s gay elite. He spewed the piss-poor philosophy that gay marriage will be the great equalizer and many in the gay community fell for it. Under his watch, poverty has been criminalized; gay teens and homeless AIDS sufferers have been thrown in jail. Persons of color are being thrown in the streets due to rising rents because of gentrification. The members of the gay elite said and did nothing; if anything, they applauded his efforts. Newsom pushed the gay marriage issue to reward his rich supporters (most poor gays and persons of color had the good sense to vote for Matt Gonzalez, his Green opponent) and build a name for himself. I’m not against gay marriage; I question the motives of the persons who are pushing the issue in this harsh political climate. If it is unsuccessful, the backlash will be severe and the gains made by the gay community these past 30 years could be overturned. People like you and me will suffer the most. If that couple in the picture in THE ADVOCATE can take off work on short notice, pay $1,500 to fly to San Francisco and pay $82 for a worthless piece of paper, I'm sure they have enough money to withstand the conservative backlash against the gay community. A campaign for gay marriage will not be successful until this community gets rid of the racist, classist, and elitist leadership that organize agendas without the input of the grassroots. Secondly, we must learn to pick our battles; there is a time to strike and a time to parry. Thirdly, and most importantly, why don’t we fight for policies that will not only help the gay community but society at large? A single payer health care system would benefit gays and straights, as would subsidized housing or a free undergraduate education. At this point, gay marriage is little more than a wedge issue to rev up the right-wing base to demolish Kerry in 2004. --T.D. Coleman * * * Chicago--I disagree with certain parts of the article "Fight Christian Right’s attacks on women’s lives" (April NEWS & LETTERS). First of all, it’s an element within the African-American Queer community that is debating the comparison of the Queer struggle with African Americans. The Stonewall Rebellion of 1969 and the early '70s Gay Liberation Movement fought heterosexism and tried to build a counterculture. The struggle of Queers and womyn are similar in that the right to control one’s sexuality and define "family" are challenges shared by both. ACT UP didn’t just fight for access to treatment, funding, research and education during the late 1980s and beyond. They also attacked the right-wing legislation that was used to punish or discriminate against--and even proposed to quarantine--people with AIDS during the Reagan/Bush years. It’s safe to say that all Queers are opposed to constitutional amendments to outlaw same-sex marriages. However there are Queers who are against the institution of marriage itself because of its inherent bias against womyn when it comes to property, inheritance, family rights, despite the reforms of marriage that came later thanks to the womyn’s movement. The institution of marriage may reinforce power dynamics within couples similar to heterosexual relationships. It also reinvents the illusion and myths of monogamous relationships which is bound by the state. The institution of marriage discriminates against single people in terms of health benefits. Only the spouse of a married person is entitled to health benefits. The Queer movement is not monolithic and doesn’t share the same view of marriage. We all do share the view that Queer relationships, however they manifest themselves, should be celebrated. --Darrell Gordon |
|
Home l News & Letters Newspaper l Back issues l News and Letters Committees l Dialogues l Raya Dunayevskaya l Contact us l Search Published by News and Letters Committees |
