This was not the first time I heard the phrase "gay is the new black" but Monique Ruffin, from the Huffington Post, had an interesting perspective on the topic. In her article she explained that:
"The civil rights issue of our time is gay marriage, and the key players in our country's most significant civil rights movement are on the wrong side of it. The black church has taken on a new role: oppressor."
She described that it is the Black Christians who are oppressing homosexuals. She says it shocks her that the black community, who should know firsthand the impact and dehumanization of discrimination, are the ones fighting against the civil rights of gays. She concludes with:
"Many blacks have not been able to reconcile their real-life experience with their faith, and until they do this, they are oppressed people who are also practicing the oppression of others."
Monique Ruffin is a black woman. Would it make a difference if she were not, in regards to this article?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/monique-ruffin/gay-civil-rights_b_1168897.html
Wow....when I read this I was instantly taken aback and not sure the direction I would like to take with my response. However, being a member of the black church I see both sides of the issue at hand therefore I will not comment on that part but rather discuss the issue of whether or not Monique's race is a key element in regards to making a difference. I do feel that with some because she is black the comments that she made towards the black church (religion is highly esteemed in the black community) are more easily tolerated versus they had come from someone from a different racial background. Its easier to hear the negatives from someone who is like you because you may feel that they have a better understanding of the issues that you face whereas someone from a different background may not.
ReplyDeleteI agree also. This article would have read very differently in terms of tone and perspective in the eyes of many readers if Monique Ruffin was of a different background.
DeleteVirginia Camille
With increased voter turnout amongst the black electorate in 2008 (mostly due to heightened excitement surrounding the Obama candidacy), California passed proposition 8, a voter referendum funded by the LDS church that prohibits same-sex marriages in the State of California. While support for the measure was just over 52% statewide, the segment of the population that most analysts agree is responsible for pushing the measure over the line is African Americans, 58% of whom supported the measure.
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand that racism is still alive and well in the United States, especially in certain geographic regions, federal and state law still affords protections to straight people, regardless of race, that are not extended to gays. Tragically, these discriminatory practices and policies are not only being tolerated by the vast majority of the black community, but black voters are indeed being used as tools of politically-powerful social conservatives who utilize oppressive, bigoted religious rhetoric to tap in to the prejudices of other similarly oppressed communities.
This discrimination against gays by the black community is a travesty and calls into question the direction of the moral compass of this portion of the electorate. Has the oppressed become the oppressor? What about those members of the black community that have intersectional identities?
Very Interesting Article however being black and also being a member of the Christian Community, as stated above in the article, I still would not compare the gay movement or struggles to the struggles of the Civil Rights or those of African American decent. Although, the two groups of people share (((SMALL)))) similarities they are NOT nor ((WILL THEY NEVER)) be compared to the struggles of those from the African American race!... I read the article and agree with certain statements that were made by Monique Ruffin, but that's the walk and belief system of one person, and her story should not speak for or reflect an entire class of "christian."... Speaking for myself... I love the sinner but hate the sin... No sin is greater than the next and I have no problem for the gay community, in fact I quite a few them. But regards of the bible. this topic is a very hard topic to speak on...
ReplyDeletebut listed Below is a link that shows how Christian should respond to the gay community... not just christian of color but all christian...
http://carm.org/bible-homosexuality -- As stated before, this is a very controversial topic. Speaking for self, I LOVE the sinner but I hate the sin... NO SIN is greater than the next...However, the article I've listed above speaks more about homosexuality... "unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: they are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:24). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing, and then they go and promote it and condemn others who don't participate in their sin. So, without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation. Without salvation, there is only damnation in eternal hell.
What should be the Christian's response to the Homosexual?
Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot LOVE him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin, and like any other sin it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross and repented of.
As a Christian, you should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same as you would for any other person in sin. The homosexual is still made in the image of God -- even though he is in grave sin. Therefore, you should show him the same dignity as anyone else with whom you come in contact. However, this does not mean that you are to approve of his sin. Don't compromise your witness for a SOCIALLY acceptable opinion that is void of godliness. Instead, stand firm in the truth that God has revealed, love him/her biblically, and pray for his salvation...."
Everyone has their own opinion on this matter, but like everything else... It's in the word... Again I do not agree with the life style of the gay community, nor do I agree with article about it's notion that "gay is the new black", but I do respect gay community and I treat them like regular people, because they are...
Personally Diva -
DeleteI find your response inflammatory and unnecessary. You are entitled to your views - with the understanding - you do not have the right to prescribe or dictate anyone else's actions. The very fact that you have interpreted this forum as a platform towards your hateful and narrow-minded views proves that oppression is not easily tackled.
If Jesus guides your personal views that is fine, maybe it is best to skip the logical appeal and put this into terms that you can understand: You aren't in heaven yet so don't count your eggs until they are hatched.
-Genevieve Blair
(Please feel free to discuss this with me in person.)
I don't even know where to begin when it comes to addressing your comment, but suffice it to say that I find it incendiary, ill-informed, bigoted, and highly offensive. While I now understand your position as it relates to the moral trappings of homosexuality, I fail to understand how your opinion substantiates or refutes any of the claims made in the original article. That stated, I take exception to your remarks and vehemently disagree.
DeleteYou ground your opinions in your identity as a Christian, African American woman. I ground mine in my identity as a homosexual man with some religious ambivalence but what I consider to be a fairly informed Christian upbringing. I am absolutely certain that you have experienced obstacles in life as an African American; moreover, you have an intersectional identity as both a racial minority and a woman. As a white man, I cannot begin to understand the challenges that you face in a white male-dominated society.
Similarly, you cannot understand the types of oppression that I experience as a homosexual man living in a heteronormative society that is hostile toward gays. The exact types of systemic barriers and cultural discrimination that have been the hallmarks of American culture throughout better part of the last three centuries are still experienced by a politically silenced gay minority today whether you choose to recognize that fact or not.
As it pertains to the religious sentiments that your comment expresses, I am troubled that you feel the privilege to act as a spokesperson for all of Christendom. While your perspective (and the perspectives represented in the article that you quote at length) are representative of a vocal minority of conservative, mainline evangelicals, it is not the only interpretation of the biblical text nor is it the sole voice in the debate over homosexuality and its role within the Christian church. Even your assertion that homosexuality is a sin seems to be informed by a shallow understanding of the doctrinal underpinnings of Christianity and a narrowly-focused, conservative political ideology.
Obviously, you are entitled to express your own religious and moral convictions in whatever way you feel comfortable and appropriate; this response is not an attempt to silence your opinion. However, it is imperative that we collectively recognize that the type of speech and language that you use to construct your opinions is in itself oppressive. Your remarks embody the same hateful spirit as the epithets railed against racial minorities by klansman, white supremacists, and proponents of apartheid - one that perpetuates heterosexist hegemony and marginalizes the gay minority.
Ladydiva21,
DeleteI understand that everyone has a personal perspective. I am a Christian. Please do not speak on behalf of everyone of this faith. There are many branches of the faith that all believe in various guidelines to living and lifestyle. Too many to state that all Christians should behave a certain way. I for one do not agree with your perspective. Please be understanding. Words have an impact. Remember what we discussed of sticks and stone in class? Keep it in mind.
-Lover Not A Fighter...usually
In the article, Ruffin claims “I don’t support the comparison [between the plights of African Americans and LGBTQ folk].” However, the article’s title hinges on a comparative description “Gay is the New Black.” Before discussing why I believe such a comparison, and the resulting constructed opposition, is problematic, I would like to touch on a few of the comments made in response to this post.
ReplyDeleteFirst, to CFlores6 (the guest blogger who posted the link): I thought this was an excellent post. In regards to your question about Ruffin’s race as a factor in this article, I agree that race matters. I see race at all times and I don’t believe that it is either possible or advantageous to the cause of ending oppression to be “colorblind.” As a woman of color, Ruffin can offer a perspective not always immediately available to me, a white male. Even though I strive to be a reflexive ally to both LGBTQ individuals and people of color, I know that my sexual/racial/gendered privilege can obfuscate my judgment and shape my perspective. However, I must also clarify that I don’t believe that an individual’s oppressed identity inherently produces anti-oppressive ideas. We’re all inundated with hegemony and we are all capable of reproducing it.
Second, in response to belmgren: I fully agree that LGBTQ oppression is longstanding and dire. Proposition 8 was such a tragedy and I am so glad that a federal court overturned Proposition 8 on Tuesday! However, it is important to remember that many African Americans (President Obama, for example) stood against Proposition 8. Also, in researching the topic, I came across Marisa Abrajano’s 2010 article “Are Blacks and Latinos Responsible for the Passage of Proposition 8? Analyzing Voter Attitudes on California’s Proposal to Ban Same-Sex Marriage in 2008” in Political Research Quarterly. Here is a portion that I thought was important to add:
While media reports attributed record rates of black and Latino turnout for the passage of Proposition 8, the analysis presented in this article paints a more nuanced picture. First, even if turnout rates among these two groups remained at the same levels as they did in the 2004 presidential race, Proposition 8 still would have garnered a majority of support from California's voters…. [Moreover] attitudes toward same-sex marriage could potentially shift over time.23 Consider that in 2000, 58 per cent of whites, 65 percent of Latinos, and 59 percent of Asians voted in favor of a ban on same-sex marriage. Eight years later, white support for Proposition 8 dropped by 9 percentage points, Asian support decreased by 10 percentage points, and Latino attitudes toward same-sex marriage experienced the greatest change, with a 12 percentage point decrease during this period (pp. 929-930).
Third, to LADYDIVA21: In speaking about this issue with a close friend who is an LGBTQ African American woman of "the Black Church," I was reminded that anti-LGBTQ sentiments are not unique to "the Black church." While this doesn't excuse homophobia, it does make one wonder why, when homophobia comes from a notable African American Christian, the headlines tell us that "The Black Church Hates Gays!" However, when Fred Phelps parades bigotry across America (or any white Christian says something or does something homophobic), these hateful messages are rarely identified as products of "the white church." Clearly, this is because in hegemonic white America, white is invisible. The white church is merely the church. An entity is not ascribed a color unless it happens to be "non-white." In short, I certainly agree with your critique that, since homophobia is a problem throughout Christianity, it is unfair to identify homophobia as unique to “the Black church.” That said, however, I am troubled by the idea that we should “hate the sin and not the sinner” because that logic still emphasizes “hate.” Isn’t hate a sin? If so, would you hate the fact that you hate to hate? Don’t hate the hater, hate the hate that you hate to hate to hate? ; ) I’m not trying to make light of any beliefs, I’m just trying to say that hating an aspect of a person’s identity is still hating a person’s identity and, ultimately, “hate the sin and not the sinner,” for me, perverts a more important biblical dictum: love your neighbor.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I think the main issue here is the construction of a false binary (or false opposition) between two marginalized groups. In her 2011 article, "The N Word vs. the F Word," communication scholar Catherine Squires warns of the media's tendency to construct a false opposition between LGBTQ and Black identities in their coverage of controversy. Such headlines are polarizing and, as explained in The Rhetoric of Agitation, polarization is persuasive. It sells papers, but doesn’t strengthen resistance to oppression. I propose that we focus on our shared legacies. For example, as many of you know, the LGBTQ movement played an integral role in the Civil Rights struggle. Halle library has an excellent documentary about Bayard Rustin, an African American gay man who was one of the leading civil rights strategists, and mentored Dr. King regarding non-violent resistance. Other prominent African American and LGBTQ activists include legendary author James Baldwin, and Huey P. Newton, co-founder of the Black Panther Party, who wrote and spoke out against homophobia and in support of the gay liberation movement.
Thanks for reading and I really enjoyed the thread!
Sincerely,
Courtney Wright
I agree with Courtney that often times oppressed groups are pitted against each other to cover up the real sources of oppression. In this case the problem isn't black churches or gay rights groups, it's simply religion. The problem isn't that black churches gate gays more than white churches. The problem is the church. The problem is that Christians and other religious groups are able to throw around their mythology and fear based mind set that warns them that if they tolerate gay people then their imaginary friend in the sky is going to rain down fire and brimstone on America. Once we get past the false racial-sexuality binary we can see the real enemy of liberation and equality: religion.
ReplyDeleteIf we're attempting to have a scholarly discussion about oppression then let's have arguments based on fact, not some dusty old book that has the academic merit and required reading level of Harry Potter. The fact is that gay people are real and deserve to have their rights addressed. Gay people definitely exist, God might. I'm siding with the real thing.
Mike
In today's society, it is interesting that we don't recognize the intersectionality of these two groups as the Squires article points out. The truth is, homosexuals have been oppressed throughout history, dating as far back as before the United States was even settled. If we make the claim that homosexuals have not experienced the same type of oppression as those of black community, we are making a very narrow-minded assumption. Similarly, if we merely identify these two groups as not only separate, but ALSO as distinct groups we are immediately labeling them as deviants in society.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, if we choose to attack religious text, we are marginalizing people who believe in the bible. We have the same issue when it comes to the Quran,some people were claiming it was the "terrorist handbook." We must realize that the interpretations of these texts is what creates bigotry and ill-informed ideologies, not the texts themselves. There are numerous groups who have been oppressed throughout history (even Christians); their struggles should not and cannot be quantified against one another. When these groups attained some sort of liberation in the name of equality, they forgot the equality part.