Zomboe has a great written analysis as well, including this:
The primary legal and social argument at the rally was to draw a close comparison between the civil rights movement of the '50s and the gay marriage movement of today; or, as this sign (and many similar signs) put it,
"Gay is the new Black!"
The goal is to position gay-marriage advocates as the defenders of civil rights, and to drag race into the discussion -- the implication being, the same type of racist bigots who opposed civil rights for Blacks 50 years ago are now opposing marriages for gays. ...
But hold on a minute. One of the main points of the civil rights movement was to guarantee that Black people have the right to vote, to get rid of Jim Crow laws which denied Blacks participation in the election process.
So, which side in this argument is trying to deny Black people the right to vote? When you consider that Black Californians overwhelmingly voted in favor of Proposition 8 (70% Yes vs. 30% No), not to mention that Hispanics also voted to ban gay marriage, whereas only white voters (by a narrow margin) voted against Prop. 8, one reaches a devastating conclusion: The white people at this rally are now trying to take away from minorities the power to vote. One could just as validly reverse the protesters' narrative and say that white Californians didn't like how the minorities voted, so the whites are trying to cancel the election and get their way by any means possible -- which entails negating the votes of Blacks and Hispanics. (Notice how 99% of the protest participants depicted in these pictures are white.)
Of course, the gay marriage post-election advocates don't like this narrative. Not one bit. And although I myself voted against Prop. 8, I am not joining in the move to have the election overturned -- which is why I distinguish "gay marriage post-election advocates" and "people at the protest" from gay marriage supporters in general.
I tagged along and eavesdropped on other reporters interviewing passersby; while most of the white interviewees were in favor of gay marriage, whenever a reporter interviewed a Black or Hispanic onlooker, most were unapologetic in their opposition to gay marriage. Which confirms the findings of the opinion polls published after the election.
There are so many great photos. I selected this one because it wasn't obscene. I guess this is a man and transvestite man who want to be married. And they think any objection is bigotry.
See it all, read it all here.
Posts
1 comment:
Hi, Perpetua.
The comparison between gay-rights and black-rights are usually about how black men and women were not allowed to marry white and in some extreme cases each other.
There is also the argument of "equal but separate" where black and white people had different benches, toilets, parts of the bus, churches etc. which were equally good but they WERE separate.
The same can be argued for partnership, in those states were it even exists. Mostly it is not equal to marriage and even when it is it can not be called marriage .. equal but separate.
As for bigotry, wikipedia sez;
A bigot is a person who is intolerant of or takes offense to the opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own.
Since most people who protest samesex couples rights to marry are heterosexuals with no connection whatsoever to gays I think "bigots" are a good term for these.
Post a Comment