GLBT It’s time. A Little Understanding of the AA Community From Us.

[bluedawg12]

Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.

My DU brothers and sisters,

Since the dismal results of the Calif. Prop8 came in Wednesday we have been going through various stages of grief, mourning, anger, and lot’s of rhetoric, which, if don’t get some understanding soon will tear at the DU GLBT and AA communities for far too long.

It’s time for some understanding on the part of GLBT members who, like me are white members, and were at a loss to explain the vote on Tuesday.

Here is an article that is excerpted, the original article linked here and while longer, is worthwhile.

If white GLBT members want to understand where the puzzling sentiments come from then take the time to look it over.

The article cites Dr. Cornell West and Dr. Michael Eric Dyson among other experts. It’s a starting point. From here we can go about asking for the help we need from the very community we seek to understand and to be understood by, in return.

( For any late comers to this two day long debate, this is not to blame the vote on AA's, it's to answer the question of "why" that has come up so often for days now. That's all.)


Peace-
bd12

...........
http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=Blacks+%2B+homophobia&fr=slv8-tyc7&u=www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Homophobia%2C_Hypermasculinity_and_the_US_Black_Church.pdf&w=blacks+black+black%27s+homophobia&d=Y-If1kLURufi&icp=1&.intl=us

or, pdf at:

http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Homophobia,_Hypermasculinity_and_the_US_Black_Church.pdf.

........

Culture, Health & Sexuality, September–October 2005; 7(5):
Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/13691050500151248

Homophobia, hypermasculinity and the US black church

Homophobia, hypermasculinity and the US black churchELIJAH G. WARDInstitute for Health Research and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago,
USA

According to the first of these perspectives, homophobia is related to literalist theologicalviews. Recent work by theologians and biblical scholars has done much to move Christian groups toward greater biblical integrity on homophobia as well as other issues (e.g. Spong1992, Nelson 1993, Helminiak 1994, Douglas 1999). Work of this kind has given contextual clarity to passages long-adhered to as justifications for homophobia. Yet, black ministers and congregations have been relatively immune to, or distrustful of, such generally white-dominated approaches to biblical scholarship and revisionism...

Homophobia in black churches is therefore directly related to the authority given to a
perceived literal interpretation of scripture in these churches (Brown 2002, Fowlkes 2003,Reed 2003). Douglas (1999:90) argues that Scripture is often the cornerstone of
homophobia in the black community’.

She explains why black people’s use of the Bible to condemn homosexuality is understandable in the context of their historical experience, as enslaved blacks sought refuge and found freedom in the literalness of Scripture.

A second line of thought holds that, among blacks, homophobia may well be at least inpart the expression of a more general fear of sexuality. Some black thinkers and scholars locate this wider fear of sexuality, and of homosexuality in particular, in a psycho-cultural response to the history of white exploitation of black sexuality during slavery andafterwards. Douglas (1999) has offered the most complete explanation of this thesis. Beyond their adaptive sense of humour in response to debilitating stereotypes, black people in the USA have been profoundly affected by the persistent efforts of whites to demonise them and their sexuality.

In the social construction of standards of beauty, measures of intelligence and assessments of moral character, elements of racism have been used to effectively privilege whiteness and denigrate blackness. Much of this has been accomplished through the institution of slavery and its aftermath. US media stereotypes developed during slavery such as that of the mammy, the jezebel,and the wild and hypersexual buck have their latter-day incarnations in the domineering matriarch, the ‘welfare queen’ and the violent and sexually promiscuous black man. The old images of blacks as bestial, lustful, wanton, lascivious, and promiscuous persist in the US psyche today.

Douglas (1999) says that Cornel West speaks for many others when henoted that institutions in the black community – families, schools, churches – have historically and assiduously avoided addressing the fundamental issue of sexuality. This reticence on the part of blacks to speak about sexuality in public grows out of a fear that it will confirm the stereotypes that whites have long held.

A third approach to explaining contemporary patterns of homophobia can be found inthe work of Crichlow (2004), who emphasizes notions of race survival consciousness.
In his treatment of Crichlow’s work, Lemelle (2004) notes that black homophobia in
North America is rooted in the moralisms about homosexuality produced in the melding –within the context of colonialism and imperialism – of both Western and traditional
African religious beliefs. These homophobic religious moralisms have dovetailed with the urgency of a racial consciousness of survival and preservation among blacks, that sought to construct black masculinity as the struggle against white domination.

Crichlow refers to this racial consciousness as bionationalism. The fallout from this ideological joining together of religion-driven homophobia and bionationalism has been that whiteness and homosexuality are both understood to connote weakness and femininity; conversely, black masculinity has been constructed in hypermasculine terms.

Beyond sources of homophobia related to experiences of slavery and racism, black people and churches have also been influenced by the homophobia prevalent in the larger US society, and by related US notions of masculinity. Current dominant US construction of masculinity include the following characteristics: a degree of mastery over one’s environment, the display of avid interest in sports, competitiveness, independence, being strong/tough, suppressing feelings, and aggressive/dominant control of relationships (Staples 1982:2, Jakupcak 2003, Seal and Ehrhardt 2003:315).

Black churches vary widely in their approach to homosexuality. However, the responses ofthe majority of black churches range from verbalised hostility toward homosexuals to, atbest, silence on the issue. Only in a small contingent of US black churches that typicallyidentify as black gay churches – usually pastored by black lesbian or gay ministers – is there an active and explicit embrace of gay/bisexual persons.

Non-denominational Christianchurches that actively embrace black lesbians and gays do in fact exist, but are typicallymulti-racial churches of which blacks comprise a minority.A palpable silence around homosexuality exists in many black churches. There are, infact, predominantly black congregations that are socially and theologically progressive. Yet these black congregations typically exist within predominantly white denominations (e.g.Homophobia, hypermasculinity and the US Black church497

Homophobia is not evenly distributed throughout black communities. Hill (2002) found
that religiosity and homophobia were predicted by social class status, defined in
educational terms. Similarly, Lemelle and Battle (2004) found that among black women,
income, education, urban residence, and age were significantly related to holding more
positive attitudes toward gay men. Nonetheless, Fullilove and Fullilove (1999) found that homophobia is common across various segments of the black community.Because black hypermasculinity, and its attendant homophobia, prevents many black menfrom engaging in much more than an appearance of intimacy (in part, for fear of appearing
‘weak’ and unmanly), black heterosexual women are often denied the experience of
emotional intimacy with their male partners. In addition, their female mates and mothers
often share the sole responsibility, and psychic burden, of knowing who these men are and what they are actually dealing with in their lives.

One important effect of homophobia among black heterosexual males in general, whether church-sanctioned or deriving from extra- church sources, is that it stifles expressions of affection, vulnerability and intimacy between men that many quietly yearn for, but learned to deny for fear of being labeled homosexual...


Finally, heterosexist and homophobic hegemonic constructions of masculinity are hardlypeculiar to black communities. They exist within white, Latino and other racial/ethnic communities in the USA and elsewhere, and it is unclear in this respect whether black churches are any more homophobic than others. Among blacks and black faith communities, however, these patterns are reinforced by an acute consciousness of race survival, as well as by racialised stereotypes of masculinity. Indeed, for black communities, religion-based homophobia and the narrow constructions of masculinity it supports can never be fully disentangled from the more fundamental, interlocking systems of racism, patriarchy and capitalism in the context of which they developed.

[rjwin]

1. prop 8 and the 1978 revelation

It was thirty years ago that the Mormon church was forced to hear their God deliver them from the IRS and thus save their tax-exempt status. It was us, the people who celebrate Obama’s victory today, that the Mormons believed were condemned to hell at birth simply because of the color of their skin. The culmination of the struggle that Obama’s election represents was, and still is largely a struggle against institutionalized racism in which the Mormon church played more than a passive role. Today I see young black kids, dressed in white shirts with black ties riding up and down neighborhood streets representing an institution, that only a few years earlier would have denied them their humanity. It is hard for me to understand how completely we have forgotten what had been done to us. It is also frightening to see how easily we accept the religious arguments that were used against us by the Mormons to deny fundamental rights to another. To those that say this is a new day, I say Damn You! If it was wrong in 1978, then it is wrong in 2008.

[bluedawg12]

6. They used scare tactics- the usual

about gays "teaching" homosexulaity in schools and also, forcing churches to marry gays.

People bought it. They sold it. They sold it because they had lot's of money and ran a political style campaign.

The irony, the RW couldn't get their lame ticket elected but could manage a hate bill.

[endthewar]

2. McCain won the white vote 55-43. I assume that whites will be tossed under the bus for this.

:eyes:

[SweetieD]

3. And in Arkansas 54% of blacks voted against gay adoptions 58% of whites voted against gay adoptions.

Where are all the white people blame posts for that?

[endthewar]

4. Whites in Arizona voted for the gay marriage ban 55-45

I need a white race voodoo doll to stick some pins in now. :rofl:

[bluedawg12]

8. They are called RW repigs and they get blame posts daily n/t

[kevinbgoode]

11. Why don't you start?

Since right now, the GLBT population is focusing on the demographics of the California decision, you can take responsibility for exposing the hate culture in Arkansas.

[bluedawg12]

21. Why don't you stay on topic and discuss the article

instead of diversions.

The second part, because we aren't being torn apart over the Arkansas culture here on DU-- I don't think anyone expected Arkansasans to vote any other way.

[bluedawg12]

7. Yes, when they were Dems and voted for Mclame

they were called names ( as we recall) and thrown under the bus.

[Librerin_114]

5. HAS ANYONE NOTICED....

The in-discrepancies? Obviously they admit that the church is part of their problem...

"Religion-based homophobia and black nationalism point to wider structures
which have influenced their emergence, including racism, patriarchy and capitalism..."

The whole reason Prop 8 passed is because of religion influencing intolerance...
We're not denying that...it's the basis for our argument against Prop 8 itself...
It doesn't matter what the race of the church...the matter is THE CHURCH...even if it is just for that particular demographic....the people who are real on the subject do not blame the PEOPLE or their beliefs...we blame the institutions who taught them such an unloving view of the world...


AND...

what about this one??

"Although many of them do not support anti-gay discrimination, evidence from mediabased
and empirical surveys indicates that significant numbers of people in the USA,
including black people, see homosexual relationships as unacceptable and morally
wrong (Crawford et al. 2002:179–180)."

"anti-gay discrimination"...

i'm not a genious...but i'm pretty sure that this is worded so that the REAL meaning is...they do not support people who discriminate AGAINST anti-gay(s).


cited from:

<http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Homophobia,_Hypermasculinity_and_the_US_Black_Church.pdf>

[bluedawg12]

9. This is the important part

"Although many of them do not support anti-gay discrimination"

That's why the appeal is about fairness and not arguing the morality of ones own life.

It is about civil rights for gays. This says people wold not support anti-civil rights discrimination.

of course, they moved the argument back to morality and fear and won.

The second part is:

"empirical surveys indicates that significant numbers of people in the USA,
including black people, see homosexual relationships as unacceptable and morally
wrong (Crawford et al. 2002:179–180)."

First of all empirical surveys are not the scientific method. But, I'll concede the point, and significant numbers of (all) people in the US still see this as a moral issue and still unacceptable."

Again, the GLBT movement cannot win a fight against "morality" because it's an unfair fight. They simply answer, "It's God's law," etc. Debate over. One can't "win" if God is on their side, or so they say.

The fight is framed therefore, in terms of what it is, discrimination against an entire3 class of citizens.

[Librerin_114]

34. I'm glad I'm not alone...

Thanks for keeping the faith. :) And thanks for elaborating on my post...

[bluedawg12]

10. OK, back on track, the question was why would AA vote against

marriage rights for gays?

That was a topic in many posts yesterday.

I found an article that might help explain it.

So, those who want to keep framing this as "why pick on AA's" here's a question.

What about this article?

Is it from a legitimate source ?

And, if it is, then, what about what this article states as homophobia in the US black church?

Is that true?

If it is....what's to be done. If anything.

[TexasObserver]

12. And that's why I say: Attack the tax exempt status of churches plying hate.

The targets that all gays and progressives should be able to agree upon are those churches which are actively pushing these measures. Attack their tax exempt status. Demand that it be removed. Demand that those who try to fund the media attacks lose their tax exempt status.

Attacking blacks and Hispanics because a higher percentage of those groups vote for anti gay measures is a waste of time and it's counterproductive. Attack the root cause, which is religion and its bigotry & tax exempt status.

The fight must be taken to the churches, like LDS and the Catholic church, who are the malevolent forces behind these measures.

[jeepnstein]

25. I'm not too sure about that one.

The minute the GLBT community begins an organized campaign to "attack" churches they will lose even more support.

Many evangelical churches sat on the fence this election and told their members to vote for what they thought was right. What do you think will happen when those congregations get sued because of the doctrine being taught? Do you think you can sue them hard enough to get the New Testament re-written? That's what it would take at that point. I'll venture a guess that they will see it as a personal attack on their values and their God, support for any kind of equality will go straight out the window.

Persecution of the Church hasn't ever been a issue in the United States. That's exactly what they'll call it if you start suing. The Bible has a pretty definite play book established about what to do in the face of that persecution and it involves not budging an inch.

1 Corinthian 6:1-11 is not ambiguous in the eyes of many church goers. I won't bother to quote it to you because I'm pretty sure everyone involved in this issue has heard it before.

I fully support your struggle for equality in civil rights. You're barking up the wrong tree trying to take on the Church. The GBLT movement will never be viewed as legitimate in the eyes of much of the Christian community. That's just the political reality you are facing.

[bluedawg12]

28. AA churches did NOT fund the Prop 8 campaign

this is a cultural question, it's about attitudes.

find out what the attitude is then there is a point of starting for a discussion.

As far as fighting the churches that did fund the politics of P8, well, movements use a variety of tactics, that may be one of them--their tax exmept status.

[bluedawg12]

26. Yes! I agree. They are already under attack by

the GLBT community.

But, I don't want to attack AA churches.

I want understanding: both ways. Of how they feel about gays and how gays now feel about them.

Then, I want some reconcilliation.

if there is such an attitude, how do we reach out to the AA churches? I don't want to fight them.

BTW- there is NO evidence of AA churches funding the political war on Prop* as did the LDasses and Cathchurch.

This is a cultural question that then goes back one step to the roll of church in a culture and how the church affects attitude.

[chimpymustgo]

13. Sorry, I have NO understanding for your RACIST SCAPEGOATING. Stop this shit NOW.

And let's work together to bring basic civil right to everyone. I am really getting pissed off by this. You better check out your MOTIVES.

[donco6]

16. Huh? Did you even read the article? n/t

[LostinVA]

33. I don't think they could have

[bluedawg12]

17. What do you think of the article? Did you read it? n/t

[kevinbgoode]

14. Yes. . .we should naturally expect the VICTIMS whose constitutional rights were stripped

to "understand" the issues of those who voted them away.

[bluedawg12]

19. Yes, we should understand, not accept

there's a difference. Until both black and white DU'ers understand the basis of the attitude we acan't go to the next stage, which is, trying to go to the core for change.

[donco6]

15. So black men need to find their "inner woman"?

And young black women need to be educated to adopt more liberal convictions. That's what I gleaned from this.

I'm all for the education part. The other . . . I'm envisioning ice cubes and fire for some reason.

[bluedawg12]

18. I read the article, it says many things starting with the premise

that the US black churches are homophobic.

is the article wrong?

[justiceischeap]

20. Upon reading this it made me stop and think the about the following:

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

So the next electoral cycle we can put a Proposition on the ballot in California and ask for the return of slavery and the African American community should go along with it because it's in the Bible. I understand that the minority vote in general was Yes because of their religious upbringing but there has to be a time when we challenge the individual's thinking. I can't speak for anyone but I'd guess that black folks don't tend to think because the Bible says slavery is okay, that it is.

Just because the Bible condemns homosexuality doesn't mean it's wrong. So using the Bible to hide behind is a mute point for me. If we need to use the Bible to point out the hypocrisy then we shall.

That all said, thanks for finding and pointing out that article. Understanding is very important but so is being educated about the facts and the facts are that people pick and choose what they believe is right from the Bible... until it affects them directly.

[bluedawg12]

22. This article gives us a chance at understanding

a chance--if we use it.

Now the article is out there for debate. Perhaps there are people who have gone to black churches who preach tolerance.

Frankly, I actually recall an interview with Jeremiah Wright and he did denounce bigotry towards gays.

The article also explains why people do "cling" to their faith and some to the literal text of the Bible, I can see it in the context of the history of AA's.

[justiceischeap]

23. Obama has the same views as Wright but I don't think he was vocal enough about it

Then there's the quote "I think marriage is between a man and a woman." That was used in Yes on 8 literature. So I could see how the AA community thought they were actually supporting their President elect. Had Obama or his surrogates stated that the Yes on 8 folks misrepresented his beliefs on the subject, it would have gone a long way.

[bluedawg12]

24. I think Obama followed a prudent policy on this

he had a greater goal, then one among many issues.

Also, GLBT issues esp. marriage is controversial.

I would rather he won, and handled it as he did, and have the chance to influence policy for eight ears and pick SCOTUS!

However, there is also blame to go around abut how this was handled by the GLBT community in Calif.

I have a good article on that. I'll dig it up and that is worhty of note.

We still have emotions running really high.

What I want to know is, if this article, which is well researched and seems from a non biased source is correct, then what are we going to do about it? HOw do we reach out to those churches and pastors?

if the article is wrong, then, it's back to search for we we seem to have lost the support of a significant portion of our AA brothers and sisters.

We stood together for Obama with out hesitation, we came together for that moment, so what happened?

[justiceischeap]

27. I was told by a black LGBTer that we, as white folk, can't reach out to them

It has to be our black LGBTers. I know there is an issue with inclusiveness within the LGBT community and that needs to be worked on. I also know running a good activist movement is difficult. I know leadership is difficult to find. If Obama proved anything it was the need for strong leadership and organization when community organizing.

For example, the Prop 8 folks in CA with their demonstrations. They should have contacted other LGBT groups nationwide and put together a demonstration at all LDS temples. That would show nationwide support for their cause, i.e. our cause. That would have garnered more national media attention than a 10 second blurb I saw on CNN this morning. They need a high-profile spokesperson to hit all the media and make it an issue that NEEDS to be covered. It's almost like we're trying to fight this battle from within the closet.

[bluedawg12]

29. YES!! White GLBT'ers aren't the ones that will influence

local AA churches. It has to come from within!

That's why, we have to identify the source of the attitude then we figure out how to change it, if possible.

Just the same as in the 60's black power, following on black pride, told white folk, properly so, to go back and clean their own homes of racism.

Frankly, it may be way too much to ask of anyone. It's almostlike saying to white folk--go out an change white fundy churches. We may never make in roads in the way we hope to do.

[bluedawg12]

30. Obama Takes On The Black Community's Homophobia

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/25/obama-takes-on-the-black-_n_83234.html

While the media concentrates on the verbal slaps between the Obama and Clinton camps, there hasn't been much traction on what Barack Obama said to a black church in Atlanta on Sunday.

Via The Politico:

"If we are honest with ourselves, we'll acknowledge that our own community has not always been true to King's vision of a beloved community," Obama told 2,000 worshippers Sunday at Atlanta's Ebenezer Baptist Church, where King once preached.
"We have scorned our gay brothers and sisters instead of embracing them."


That's a pretty strong stand to take in a community, and in a church no less, where homophobia is considered rampant.
........

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/deadlineusa/2008/jan/24/obamatakesontheblackcommu

POSTSCRIPT: After his speech, the same Politico article reported gay bloggers peered more closely into the background of the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, who endorsed Obama on Saturday. To their consternation, it appears Caldwell's Houston church promotes a ministry that proclaims it can cure homosexuals. While Caldwell says he had no idea the church had such a ministry, this shouldn't be a cause for concern among homosexuals concerning Obama's allegiance to gay rights. After all, making a statement such as he did after Caldwell's endorsement would appear more antagonistic than opportunistic. Every political coalition cannot agree on everything. And having the Caldwells in the fold leaves them more receptive to persuasion on issues they don't initially agree with progressives on, in this instance gay rights. To want allegiance to orthodoxy in all your political allies is folly, because there won't be many allies left when you take that track
....

[bluedawg12]

31. A new book out on AA chuch's teaching by AA rev who is gay

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/History_of_homophobia_in_black_churches_1008.html

>>"The book, Their Own Receive Them Not: African American Lesbian and Gays in Black Churches, written by Rev. Horace L. Griffin, an Episcopal priest, is billed as an attempt to break "hundreds of years of silence," arguing that homophobia in the historically black church has reached "crisis" proportion.

"The black church's teaching that homosexuality is immoral has created a crisis for lesbian and gay Christians in black churches," Rev. Griffin writes in the preface. "This black-church-sanctioned homophobia produces a lot of twisted black people."

According to a press release, Rev. Griffin, who is black and gay, grew up in a Missionary Baptist church and through his life and church experience, has witnessed how "black church leaders and congregants have been resistant and even closed in treating gay and heterosexual congregants equally or, in many cases, of simply offering compassion to gay people."

Griffin compares the plight of black gays and lesbians to "a game of Russian roulette," where the children of the church are no longer welcomed by the church, and black lesbian and gay Christians find themselves in "no-win situations," which end up robbing them of "their soul, if not their integrity, family and lives."

"Until black church leaders adopt different Christian approaches, 'Down Low' practices will continue," concludes Griffin. <<

[HamdenRice]

32. My honest opinion is the article is incoherent

You asked about it in another thread, and here was my response, which I thought I should repost here since you wanted to provoke discussion:

It may be in a peer reviewed article, but that doesn't mean it's correct. It's basically a cultural criticism piece, and little more than opinion.

I think parts of it are right, parts of it are ludicrous.

I should mention that I was a student of Cornell West, and respect him greatly, and he is cited in the article, but did not write it.

The basic point of the article is that homophobia in the African American community comes from the church and hypermasculinity of the kind demonstrated by "gangstas".

The problem with that argument is that gangsters don't go to church. Moreover, church membership tends to make African American men adopt a completely different "male identity" that is consistent with middle class and working class Christianity -- the responsible husband and father type.

The analysis of the church's theology makes little sense to me, because he is arguing that Black Churches are scriptural fundamentalists. That assertion is controversial to say the least. Cornell West writes and speaks of an evolving prophetic tradition -- ie he contradicts the description of the Black Church as scripturally fundamentalist. Even Martin Luther King was not a scriptural literalist.

The passage that summarized Cornell West I think is closest to the mark -- namely that the Black Church is largely silent on sexuality of all kinds. I remember the first time going to a Catholic mass and I was flabbergasted by the emphasis on sexual behavior in the homily -- something that would only be discussed in the most indirect way in a mainstream Black Church.

In general, I thought the article verged on the incoherent.