Comparing Civil Rights to Gay Rights
By Keith Boykin, in politics
Thursday, December 1 2005, 12:41PM
There's a scene in The Color Purple, the movie, where Shug Avery is singing in a lounge when she hears the distant echoes of a familiar song. The choir at her father's church is singing "God Is Trying To Tell You Something" and when Shug hears it, she stops singing her jazz tune and walks out, leading a procession of fans and band members on a trip to the church. In full voice, she bursts into the church, confronts her father and reconciles their years of division. "See daddy, sinners have soul too," she whispers in his ear.
Maybe God is trying to tell us something today too. This year, World AIDS Day falls on the 50th anniversary of Rosa Parks's courageous decision to refuse to give up her bus seat, a move which sparked the modern civil right movement. But today is also the day when Oprah Winfrey's The Color Purple opens on Broadway. And it's the day when the highest court in South Africa has ruled that "gay marriage" must be made legal in that country.
Your Blues Ain't Like Mine
"Can you compare civil rights with gay rights?" That's the question a young student at Vassar College asked me Monday night after I spoke at the school. "Of course you can," I told her. "The problem is that when people hear 'compare' that think they hear 'equate' and black people are reluctant to equate the civil rights movement with the gay rights movement." But to compare simply means to look at the similarities and differences, and on that score, we absolutely can and should compare the civil rights movement with the gay rights movement.
One of the principal arguments raised against comparing black suffering with gay suffering is the red herring that gays did not have to sit in the back of the bus in the same way that gays did. Well, not exactly. Of course gays had to sit in the back of the bus because some gays were black. Bayard Rustin was a black gay man, and one of Dr. King's closest advisers, and he too was forced to sit in the back of the bus. The simplistic reductionist view that seeks to create a wedge between sexuality and race ignores the reality that some blacks are gay and some gays are black.
But there's a larger issue here too. Why does it matter if gays had to sit in the back of the bus? We don't tell Latinos or Native Americans or people with disabilities or women or any other oppressed group that they have to prove their suffering is identical to black suffering in order to be legitimate. Nor are we concerned with which group is worse off in the artificially constructed hierarchy of oppression when we talk about other minorities.
The point is it doesn't matter which group is most oppressed or which was first oppressed or whether they are identically oppressed. What matters is that no group of people should be oppressed. But the more we focus on the hierarchy of difference, the less we focus on the actual oppression.
It's Our Anniversary
That's why I take great comfort in South Africa's decision to move toward marriage equality today. It's the second time in two years when a major civil rights anniversary has fallen on the same day as a major victory in the marriage equality struggle. Last year, on the 50th anniversary of the famous Brown v. Board of Education decision, the state of Massachusetts outlawed marriage discrimination against gays and lesbians. That also sparked outrage from conservative forces in the black community who want to protect the image of the civil rights struggle.
But black people don't hold a monopoly on the civil rights movement. That movement began long before Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat or before Dr. King gave his famous speech in Washington. Dr. King himself acknowledged that many of his tactics and strategies were developed by Mahatma Gandhi in an entirely different struggle years before and thousands of miles away. And Gandhi too learned his philosophy from others.
Over the course of history, the people of the world have been slowly moving toward freedom as we have liberated ourselves from oppressive socially-constructed restrictions on our identities. Fifty years ago, no one thought that a black woman should sit in the front of the bus with white people. Today, a powerful black woman with the most influential show on television will premiere a huge Broadway show adapted from a Pulitzer Prize-winning novel written by another successful black woman.
I am confident that 50 years from now we will look back at this day in the same way we look back at the anniversary of Rosa Parks's courageous move. Our children and grandchildren will wonder why our society was so obsessed with perpetuating bigotry against gays and lesbians. And they will ask us which side we were on and what did we do to make a difference.
Comments conceal
Rae
December 1 2005, 1:18PM
Thanks for helping me articulate this argument while discussing this matter with others.
alicia banks
December 1 2005, 1:43PM
ditto keith!!!
no sane person would ever equate racism with gay hatred nor civil rights with gay rights...
and no honest person would ever claim that any sane person has ever done so...
the problem is that blacks hate gays as much as whites hate blacks...and therein lies the problem/deception/confusion etc...
special rights are equal rights for hated people
and
special rights can always be scapegoated as
negating the rights of those who oppress hated people
peace
ab
bucknips
December 1 2005, 2:22PM
Thanks Keith. Clear, concise and powerful. "I got it.
Trent
December 1 2005, 3:37PM
Thank you for differentiating between "comparing" and "equating" the struggles of civil rights for the general black population and the general gay and lesbian population. This is usually the fulcrum in a conversation on gay civil rights where any further discussion begins to deterioate. For all the many obvious differences, there does exist similarities which all boil down to wanting to be free of oppression and treated fairly, a right due to any human regardless of race, sex, and sexual orentation.
Freedom from prejudice should also extend to gay people of color within the gay community itself who continue to be marginalized.
Bill
December 1 2005, 3:45PM
Being a sane person, at least I believe I am sane, I have to take issue with the comment that no sane person would equate racism with hatred of gays. How are they really different? Both deal with hatred of a group based on factors over which the hated group has absolutely no control (race or sexual orientation). In both cases a litany of demeaning stereotypes has been developed to justify the hatred (inferiority of blacks, deviancy of gays). Some gays can avoid the problem by not acknowledging their gayness. That is the same as how some black can avoid their problems by not acknowledging their blackness.
The arguments used historically to justify the oppression of blacks are identical to those used today to justify the oppression of gays. Take marriage for example. Until 1961 blacks could not marry whites in many states for reasons of tradition and social norms and the fear that interracial children would be disadvantaged. Today, gays cannot marry because of tradition and social norms and the fear that the children of gay parents will be disadvantaged. How about gays in the military- that was an argument of troop morale. The same exact argument was made in respect to integrating the armed forces in the 1940s.
There was a time in this country when churches (not all, but many) supported discrimination against blacks. Today we have many black churches precisely because of that discrimination. I am sure the racist congregations at the time had pointed scriptural citations to justify their discrimination. Today, we have churches (not all, but many) that use scripture to justify discrimination against gays. That there are any black churces that do that (and there are many) is a crime.
Let's not be too PC here. Hatred is hatred, whether it is based on the fact that you are Jewish, black or gay. I think the fact that so many blacks think that discrimination against gays is a "lesser discrimination" is a big problem for the black communiity. It explains why the black churches get away with blatant homophobia. It explains why music is so homophobic and it probably has something to do with those ridiculously high HIV rates for blacks.
I say make no apologies for discrimination against gays. Call it for what it is- hatred, pure and simple.
Laura
December 1 2005, 4:13PM
to me, it boils down to supremacy issues.
Black people are not above the supremacist mentality, though our experience in white supremacist america has FBOFW defined "the minority experience in America". a lot of people want to cling to that mantle and wear it as a badge, instead of thinking through what "liberty and justice for all" really means.
heterosupremacists can kiss my ass, i don't give a crap what their skin color is.
clay cane
December 1 2005, 4:18PM
interesting comments on here ... it is funny - i have never met a gay person, or more specifically, a white gay person say that gay and civil rights are the SAME. i think the ruling class wants people to believe that so they can shout: "Don't let them faggots think they got it worse than you niggers!"
Laura
December 1 2005, 4:26PM
clay cane said, "i have never met a gay person, or more specifically, a white gay person say that gay and civil rights are the SAME."
i have. plenty.
what's unfortunate is that INVARIABLY, NONE of them EVER know the first thing about Civil Rights...they think it began with Rosa Park's feet and ends with MLKs dream. I wish that were an exaggeration.
They can't recall ANY history, ANY laws, even the basics like Plessy decision and the Brown decision.
i got really sick of having to educate them just to have a rational conversation with them, so i gave up, years ago. i believe this is also one reason why heterosexual Blacks resent white or non-Black gays making this claim.
but what they do to us is no better: first game the want to play is that old stale, oh you're a (expletive of choice) because you're whitewashed/oreo/etc., regurgitate some claptrap about "the bible sez", and end the conversation there.
zero critical thought from either camp...f. 'em all, i'm sick of them.
Kola Boof
December 1 2005, 6:01PM
All of these issues....are HUMAN rights.
Irregardless of color or sex.
++++
And yes folks---"irregardless" is a word, often used by my idol ALICE WALKER in her books.
I also want to take this moment to thank Toni Morrison for "creating" the word...."rememory".
Because a fellow poster here challenged me on this several weeks ago, I did some snooping.
Irregardless is a word.
cmoney
December 1 2005, 6:50PM
People who object to comparing gay rights to Black civil rights really have a problem with the fact that the other people seking equality are gay. These same people have no problem acknowledging the discrimination that Jews suffered or that the handicap suffer, yet have a major objection to the struggle of gays even being mentioned in the same breath as the Black civil rights movement. From their point of view, civil rights are OK, as long as they don't hate you. How ironic.
Laura
December 1 2005, 6:52PM
"From their point of view, civil rights are OK, as long as they don't hate you. How ironic."
yes! Civil rights are for Black heterosexuals, only!
god said so! lol
Regan DuCasse
December 1 2005, 10:22PM
I can clear this up, and I've equated these terms of civil rights this way.
Jim Crow was enforced and blacks isolated not just because of color...
color was a means of ACHIEVING Jim Crow.
But white preoccupation with black sexuality, carried the SAME paranoia, and anxiety that homophobia does.
The anxiety so acute and pernicious that the most casual of social encounters could turn deadly.
Check out Gunnar Myrdal's study of the South
called "An American Dilemma".
Whites were concerned about black sexuality.
Blacks were concerned about jobs, housing, access to education.
Segregation and the violence that enforced it, was a means to ensure that no black man would even think about looking with longing at a white woman.
And it was a means of ensuring that a black woman could be sexually exploited at the whim
of any white man.
Even the elite, like Strom Thurmond, for example.
This is shared history between blacks and gays.
But women are not men, whites not black, Christian not Jew and secular not religious.
So NOBODY'S experience will be the same.
But isolating a non criminal GROUP for the sole purpose of dehumanization, unequal treatment and violence...DESPITE their commitment to integrate peacefully with society at large, is always wrong, evil and squanders great potential.
THIS is what should have been the lesson of segregation. Whose legacy still haunts us.
Eva Young
December 1 2005, 11:38PM
Good post, Keith, what's interesting about this, is that though you often hear that you can't compare civil rights with gay rights from some of the usual suspects, that the anti-gay activists who try to exploit that forget that many of the same people who don't like gays benefiting from civil rights arguments, make similar arguments to oppose women's rights, or even to talk about discrimination against other ethnic minorities.
Did you see Pam Spaulding's post about some anti-gay black ministers praying gay rights away:
http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2005/12/trying-to-pray-gay-rights-away.html
shanna
December 2 2005, 12:00AM
just wanted to say well said and ditto on all counts. i wish people could see the simplicity. it doesn't matter how or who is oppressed ... just that there are people out there who are. And that's not right.
Erick
December 2 2005, 12:24AM
I think we're clear as black gay Americans that homophobia runs through the black community like any other racial/ethnic community but like Laura articulated, let's not forget as gay black Americans the racism that runs through our "other" community. I agree with Keith's article and most of the commentary but my experience has been that many gay white Americans are making the comparison to only benefit other gay white Americans. Their desire for equality for gay Americans doesn't seem to always include all of their sisters and brothers. If it did, there would be no need for informative websites like Keith's and others to offer insight and support. Let's not forget to continue battling that other monster. Especially when standing side by side with everyone to ensure that all gay Americans obtain equal rights and protections.
Mel Smith
December 2 2005, 12:44AM
I love all the comments but I think that it's important to remember that gay haters don't distinguish us by color when they attack us. The blacks that hate us do not care what our skin color is. They hate us because we are gay. One black "Christian" gay hater who I debated on the blackplanet.com website stooped so low to say that I am not black, after I sent him a message informing him that black gays deal with color prejudice and hetersexism(more than any other prejudice). Now, I am not a violent person, but that fool really hit a nerve!
Chris
December 2 2005, 8:49AM
Several prominent black religious leaders have said that gay rights are not the same as civil rights and accuse gays and lesbians of "hijacking" the civil rights movement for their own agenda. But Coretta Scott King said it best in response to the criticisms when she reminded them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'
Chris
http://creolegumbo.blogspot.com/
Kaccompany
December 2 2005, 10:01AM
The experiences of gay men and women and the experiences of black men and women are obviously different in many ways but similar in many others. The struggle for civil rights and equality, however, is but ONE STRUGGLE. Coretta Scott King gets it... Al Sharpton gets it... Julian Bond gets it... Carol Moseley Braun gets it... John Lewis gets it. This whole "my struggle is harder than your struggle" does no one any good.
Regan DuCasse
December 2 2005, 1:03PM
The beautiful thing about homosexuality is that it's embedded in every culture on the planet.
Homosexuality is indigenous to all humankind. Universal and enduring.
It doesn't matter what family structure, religion or region you come from.
The difference through the ages is how homosexuality was RESPONDED to.
One very oversimplified observation by ONE man quoted in the Bible, has been the unfairly set standard for treatment of gay people ever since.
Other holy books have no such proscriptions and of course not all cultures rejected homosexuality or thought it a symptom of evil doing.
And since gay men and women are not strangers, nor widely unique or distinct...
by that token there shouldn't be destructive discrimination against gay people as if peacefully integrating is a crime.
This you heard from a straight black woman that's EXTREMELY sick of the conceit of heterosexuals and radical conservatives trying to teach me to be afraid of gay people.
And trust, that I tell them ALL of this, strongly, to their faces...that I'm onto all their bullshit and to get over themselves.
Regan DuCasse
December 2 2005, 1:17PM
The ugly and double edged situation about gay marriage is...segregationist bigots worked to have certain groups
'stick to their own kind'
clearly where gay men and women are concerned..they contradict themselves.
Regan DuCasse
December 2 2005, 1:20PM
The sad truth is, bigotry inevitably has a double edge.
Segregationist bigots worked to ensure that certain groups had to
'stick to their own kind'
Clearly where gays and lesbians are concerned, especially in marriage, the segregationists illogically contradict themselves.
alicia
December 2 2005, 2:30PM
sane people know that the true definition of "equal" implies "exact sameness"...until white gays are bred like animals for centuries, stripped of their religion, institutiionally oppressed via systemic genocide for decades etc......then again i say:
no sane person would equate homo hatred to racial bigotry...but indeed they do share many similarities
for more on these undeniable distinctions and differences
see more on
black gaybashers
gay racism
etc...
at my site
fyi
peace
ab
Laura
December 2 2005, 4:17PM
Chris said, "Several prominent black religious leaders have said that gay rights are not the same as civil rights and accuse gays and lesbians of "hijacking" the civil rights movement for their own agenda."
mild correction: those are camera ready handkerchiefheads with airtime, handpicked by well funded anti-Black, anti-gay conservatives.
any scumbucket who gets up and proclaims to the world "gay rights isn't civil rights because blacks can't change their color and gays can change" blah blah is implying that if they COULD change their color, they WOULD.
prominent may they be, these self-hating swine are not leaders, by any stretch.
Bklynbro
December 2 2005, 8:08PM
Thank you, Keith. My sentiments exactly.
dorsano
December 2 2005, 8:55PM
Very well written - very well reasoned - very timely. Thank you.
Mel Smith
December 3 2005, 12:14AM
Huh! Black heterosexuals are not the only people who contributed to the Civil Rights Movement. We want the same rights heterosexual people have and nothing less. We can't let those heterosexists fools forget that black gays contributed to the Movement too. Their evil brand of hyprocrisy Christianity will not win them any points with God. It's too bad that we let selfish evil people divide our community on issues that should not divide us.
Donovan
December 3 2005, 3:11PM
It's a very dicey area when you choose to compare struggles. It cheapens both to somehow say that they're the same. No one knows what it's like to be gay unless you're gay and no one knows what it's like being black unless you're black. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. I know that it can strengthen the argument for gay rights if it has the credibility of civil rights. But shouldn't it be resonable enough on it's own? I'm gonna make a post on my blog. feel free to comment there. incitingariot.blogspot.com
Jeff
December 3 2005, 3:54PM
Yes each struggle has different issues but at the core of each struggle was the fight to have the basic rights of the majority when the majority says you can't because you don't fit into what they deem as normal. You're different therefore you're not worthy of the same rights that I have. It's natural for other minority groups to use the civil rights movement as a model. The only time there seems to be animosity is when homosexuals use the model.
Laura
December 3 2005, 7:32PM
"No one knows what it's like to be gay unless you're gay and no one knows what it's like being black unless you're black. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME."
actually, black gays are really the only people qualified to either validate or invalidate the comparison, and i find it really interesting that plenty of people have plenty to say on it without even bothering to consult the people who know both because we live both.
personally, i refuse to split myself in half to please either anti-Black gays or Blacker than thou heterosexual Blacks.
screw both parties, who needs em, they are in the way.
Phoenix
December 5 2005, 7:52PM
We will never be able to change the attitude of all people...What is most important is to have laws that protect and apply the corrective measures when someone becomes stupid enough to step out of line.
Laura
December 6 2005, 4:12PM
Phoenix said, "We will never be able to change the attitude of all people...What is most important is to have laws that protect and apply the corrective measures when someone becomes stupid enough to step out of line."
exactly. i don't give a crap what they think, it's a free country they can think what they want.
they are just not permitted to force the rest of us to live by their hangups. that's where the rubber always meets the road with both racists/white supremacists, and homophobics...they think they get to use the state to enforce a lifestyle of ignorance and irrational hatred.