Why California's Proposition 8 (ban on gay marriage) Passed
But there was a secondary demographic impetus that caused the measure to pass, and it's going to be very interesting to see how people deal with this piece of the puzzle, because I can't really see a politically correct way to handle the issue without causing an eruption in the usual suspects that make up this grass roots membership. Here, I'll post some interesting information from the election, and tell me if you see a concern.
Maybe it's just me, but I see an anomaly in the data that is a glaring problem. It seems that if the proponents of a change to this constitutional amendment want to attack the issue again, that grass roots momentum is going to have to address a specific demographic that they have always kind of thought was in their pocket all along.You see, there's an interesting dilemma here because these wannabe social activists sort of assume that African-Americans will automatically support social issues because they have been treated as marginalized, disenfranchised people for so long. But when this issue of gay marriage, or gay rights, came up, the African-American community has come out as a direct barrier to the social agenda.
Why this group is the most active supporter of anti-gay rights, or anti-gay marriage, is really for others to discuss. What is important is that the people who keep trying to force tolerance down the throats of those who don't see eye to eye with them on such issues are going to have to realize that they have a much different fight on their hands that can't be won by shaming the other side or hoping that things will just work out for their cadre, because things won't.
You see, a whole new approach is needed, or the issue will never turn in their favor. Think about this, which is what educated activists should have been thinking in the first place: The general demographic of a social activist in this country, and especially in California, tends to be a young, white college-educated female. The last characteristic is less prominent in the statistics, meaning we can level it out to approximating a young, white college-educated person. The issue is being argued as "civil rights" or "human rights". The usual rhetoric has been to condemn anyone that is against gay rights as someone who is out of touch and intolerant. Now, notice who makes up the greatest constituency of the demographic they are targeting. In other words, let me explain it: YOUNG, WHITE COLLEGE-EDUCATED PEOPLE ARE TELLING AFRICAN-AMERICAN CITIZENS THAT THEY NEED TO BE MORE TOLERANT TOWARDS OTHER PEOPLE. Now, honestly, try to sell that one. Privileged young folk are making the argument that a long-time, disenfranchised, marginalized group of people who have fought over the span of generations to achieve their civil rights THAT they need to be more tolerant of other people. Good luck with that project.
So, having said that, for reasons I don't understand because the people who should be listening never do (they always know better than anyone else because THEY "understand things better than the rest of us"). If they want to win this next time, they need to approach the African-American community with a respectful attitude and explain why gay marriage should be allowed. Attempt to shame them, you lose. Attempt to reason with them using third graders' analysis, you lose. There can be such a commonality between both sides, but as long as they keep "assuming" it's just going to fall in place, then they'll continue to lose and never understand why they lost.
I've been reading some analysis on why Prop 8 passed, and again, it seems to be a choir singing to another choir without even knowing the song.
Labels: Elections
Stumble It!


0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home