Not So Fabuloso: Latinos and Proposition 8

If you should ever walk down the street of a major American city with my wife, you should not (by her own admission) listen to her she asks the innocuous question, "What's over there?" Her curiosity about hidden doors and blinking marquees has mistakenly led us into shady dives from coast to coast (imagine my surprise at walking into an S&M bar in Hollywood).

One evening, "what's over there" prompted us to enter a covert LA nightclub, where the doorman smiled and waived the cover charge. I had assumed he did so because it was Ladies Night. But when we walked in, I saw that he had not let us in for free because of my wife. It was because of me. It was a Latino gay bar, and the doorman assumed that I was a non-straight who had brought along my hipster female friend. To make things more interesting, a talent show for drag queens was just starting. What could I do but order a beer and watch the performances? My wife and I agreed that the Christina Aguilera was pretty close to the real thing.

I was not surprised that Hispanic gay men might establish a safe house off the beaten path. Loathing of gays shows hydra-headed persistence within Latino culture. We are the society, after all, that defined the word "macho." The old-school standards for strong Hispanic males include getting into brawls, avoiding the kitchen, and womanizing at will. They do not include an affinity for techno music and an interest in Jennifer Lopez's wardrobe.

As such, possibly the worst insult that one can lob at a Latino male is the dreaded M-word. To call someone a "maricon" is to take the nearest English equivalent ("faggot"), triple its intensity, add several layers of hatred and disgust, and square the result. In my generation at least, nobody jokes about this word or uses it lightly.

In contrast, American gay activists have adopted the words "queer" and "dyke" in an attempt to rob them of their degrading power, similar to the way in which many African Americans throw around the fabled N-word. It's a subject of fierce debate whether these tactics work or are self-sabotaging, but in either case, I'm pretty sure nobody in Latin America is even trying that with "maricon." In fact, being gay in Latin America ranges from affront to God (we're talking about heavily Catholic countries) to active death warrant in the small villages of Central and South America.

But surely American Latinos have progressed beyond the rigid cultural norms of their home countries - right? Well, a golden opportunity to prove this evolution presented itself in the form of Proposition 8 in California.

As we know, the ban on gay marriage received ample support from Obama backers. Much of the coverage of this oxymoronic outcome has focused on the high percentage of black people who shouted, "free at last" when they voted for president and then muttered, "damn the homosexuals" as they revoked a basic civil right.

But California has a high number of Latinos (ask any right-wing demagogue for verification of this fact), and Obama was hugely popular with them, winning their vote by over two to one against McCain. So it is indeed a sad fact that a great many Latinos mimicked their African American brethren on Election Day.

To be specific, 53 percent of California Hispanics voted for the proposition. While this is not an overwhelming majority, it still tops the percentage of overall voters who approved of the ban (52 percent). It is also contradictory to their supposed enthusiasm for a liberal president.

Is it possible that the old boogeyman, the Catholic Church, is somewhat responsible for the invincible strain of homophobia in Latino culture? To the surprise of absolutely no one, the answer is yes.

Statistics from Hispanic Business show that 64 percent of Latino Catholics voted for the proposition. Just 10 percent of non-religious Hispanics voted the same way.

So it's not just burly macho hombres who hate gays that are tipping the vote. It's quiet, polite Latina grandmothers who are willing to overlook Obama's pro-choice tendencies, but can't bring themselves to acknowledge that gay people have rights. Let's be clear: When pundits talk about social conservatism among the otherwise Democratic-friendly Latino population, this is what they're talking about.

However, despite the fact that homophobia is strong in Hispanic culture, Latino gays still find ways to burst out from underground. These manifestations range from the intellectualism of the great Cuban writer Reinaldo Arenas to the pop-culture pabulum of Hank Azaria dancing around in "The Birdcage." And what would a gay-pride parade be without at least one Carmen Miranda impersonator?

It's a broad range of expression. Perhaps it's hopeful, or maybe it's pathetic. I can't tell you, because I'm just a guy who walks obliviously into gay bars.

Comments

[Daniel Cubias - Huffpost Blogger]

For the record, I wasn"t implying that all Hispanics are Catholic, or all Catholics are homophobic, or other "a equals b equals c" conclusions. My point is that Latino culture has a powerful one-two punch in traditional machismo and religious upbringing that makes homophobia tough to eradicate.

[Gothfather]

I seriously don't understand why this should be a racial issue. The religious aspect I understand because it makes sense that people so narrowly focused on their dogma would not see out side their narrow sand box. But why would race make a difference. We have spent so much time trying to 'cross over' into mainstream america, indicating - as so many parents did, that we needed to blend in or fit in, why does this now become an issue. See if some of you can remember when we first tried to marry a white woman and tell me if all the hate and anger over that did not affect you. So what difference does it make to you, if your marriage is solid, if two people of the same sex love each other? We fought so hard to become america and now we want to become what 'they' were to us? People, stop being so pathetic and abhorrent of what the issue truly is - it's love...and that shouldn"t be quarantined by race or religion. We can be and should be better than that.

[ruthinking]

Here is a little personal factoid: I come from a Hispanic family of 8 and I am the ONLY remaining Catholic in my family (and strongly opposed Prop 8). Hispanic does NOT equate Catholic.

But I am not also sure what this blame game is accomplishing anyway. I do believe Prop 8 will be overturned, and no doubt in much less time (!!) than it took for the US to elect an AA for President.

[randyjet]

As a long time liberal, atheist, I oppose gay marriage since it advances no societal interest. You don't have to base opposition on religion alone, and it is a slander to state otherwise. Marriage is NOT a right such as freedom of speech. It is a privilege the states grant and a legal device to promote the interests of the STATE as well as that of the individuals. We don't have a right to a drivers license either.

Gay marriage is not something that will negate or restrict any freedoms gays have now. What is being asked for is a privilege and state sanction legally for co-habitation with no corresponding benefit for the state. Thus I am opposed to it.

[KevinVT]

No societal interest? Well, perhaps... no more than straight marriage.

How about kids? Isn't marriage supposed to stabilize families? Because if there's no legal relationship to one parent, they can be taken away if the other parent dies.

The CA supreme court has already settled this question. Marriage IS a fundamental right. No point going back over that argument.

You'd think some people don't read court decisions!

[Hephaestion]

So we live only for the benefit of the State??? Wow.

Injustice is injustice. We are all either equal or we are not. So I guess you want to change the pledge to the flag to say "... with liberty and justice for heterosexuals."

[Quaoar]

Since when does something have to advance a societal interest in order to be legal?

[Strepsi]

NOT TRUE.
randyjet, flat out not true. How about some facts:
1) Supreme Court ruled that the right to choose one's marriage partner IS a right (in legalizing inter-racial marriage).
2) Many churches WILL bless and perform same sex marriage (United, Unitarian, some Episcopalian and synagogues). For the state then NOT to recognize it, as it does with straight marriage, where licenses are conferred more or less automatically, is to "negate and restrict" the equality and freedom of gays.
3) There is benefit to the state in bringing real relationships out of legal limbo and into State recognition. I have been legally married 5 years (Canadian) and I now pay MORE taxes. MORE. TAXES.
4) The word "marriage" may not be a human right but it is a civil one -- and because it defines your "next of kin" as your spouse, it AUTOMATICALLY CONFERS RIGHTS. From estate law to health care benefits, to child custody, to immigration, it confers nearly 1000 state and Federal RIGHTS.
5) If the state were to get out of the religious business and only allow legal civil partnerships, that would also be equal -- but again, some churches will still perform gay "marriage" so there will still be gay marriage. How can you be against it?

[TommyObama]

Sure Randy...and Separate but Equal was just fine, too.

[johnsopinion]

From outside the bubble, the one thing the Catholic Church (big time) and
most religions has sold to, well.... the entire world, is 'guilt'!
They will not acknowledge it but they perpetuate and intensify it generation
after generation. Address that problem and you will solve many problems
facing people now.

[LeBelAge]

So its not enough for the media to blame African-Americans, they must now scapegoat Latinos too. This is divide and conqueror tactics. Pitting miniorities groups against one another.

There is must work to be done from all sides in terms of understanding each others oppression.

The real bad guys here are the right wingers through certain churhes who are exploiting prejudice or misunderstanding between different groups of people to garner political power.

[LeftLatino]

53% vs 52% is not really a big difference is it? I agree homophobia is a problem in latino culture but it's also a problem in the american culture at large.

[Mildmannered]

maybe the Catholic Church should lose their tax free status?

[Ganapati]

Thank you, thank you for saying this.
Religiously motivated homophobia.
Say it out loud.

[SonofLiberty1]

Sounds like anti religious heterophobia to me...

[LeeCalif]

People of all stripes were fooled into supporting this discriminatory proposition.
The P.R. firm had to use lies and scare tactics and threats of loss of parental control to win

The discriminatory Prop 8 was managed by a guy named Schubert. Hired by the Mormons.
Schubert has a P.R. firm with offices in Orange County & Sacramento.

They have been on the side of big business, anti-union, conservative Republican, anti-consumer initiatives. In New Jersey, Oregon & California.
It was Schubert's P.R. group, Schubert Flint Public Affairs with offices in Sacramento & Orange County that lied their way to victory on this one, folks. He is STILL the front man for this in TV and print interviews. They made a TRUCKLOAD of money on this.

Their tack is to control public opinion for their client by molding & shaping public opinion..
That is done by having "operatives" write letters to the editors of hundreds of newspapers, getting those newspapers to editorialize on their client's behalf, and to manufacture commercials that seem homey
& quaint & protective of 'plain Americans'. All the time lying without compunction. They use sponsorship names that sound like grassroots organizations but are anything but.

They have been extremely successful. They are extremely dangerous.

We need to start a P.R. offensive of our own.

[TommyObama]

Because the three big anti-gay marriage proposals were in CA, AZ, and FL, we have had an opportunity to get a good glimpse of hispanic voter trends on this issue, and you're right, Mr Cubias, about their apparent hostility to gay rights. At least we in Arizona can take some comfort in knowing the numbers here were closer to CA's than they were to FL's, yet still, some of the people we liberal gays have been supporting for years took the opportunity to smack us down, and hard.

Food for thought: the three aforementioned states all rely heavily on the initiative process to qualify proposals designed mostly to draw out right-wing, and sometimes left-wing, voters. That was certainly the rationale for AZ's Prop 102, by the GOP's own admission. Proposals on affirmative action, immigration reform, harsher treatment of undocumented aliens, English-only, bilingual education and the like will certainly come up again at some point in these three state's futures.

As a liberal gay man who has always voted (and sometimes campaigned) for tolerance on such issues in the past, should I continue doing so? Or can I go ahead and vote against the racial and ethnic minorities (perhaps benefitting myself in the process) who saw fit to vote against me and mine this time? Because I really want to know.

[Jaidit]

Tommy,

Don't sell out your principles. Yeah, I wish we had won. I wish Prop 8 had gone down in flames and that everyone had seen it as an unprincipled attack on equality. It didn't go that way. Too many people in too many categories fell for their carefully crafted lies.

I was told by a Prop 8 supporter that she was in favor of gay rights and that Prop 8 didn't take any rights away from gay people. She was wrong.

I'm going to try to convince people to get behind equality. I'm not going to impede attempts at making our world more equal and more fair just because some of the people who were helped didn't help me.

Don't the conservatives want me to vote, not only against my own interests, but against the interests of other marginalized groups? I'm not selling anyone out.

They didn't prove themselves to be shoulder-to-shoulder with us. They certainly won't be if we become a group that is reliably against their interests.

[monicaangela]

Great comment Jaidit, I wish everyone thought as rationally as you do.

[TommyObama]

You're right, of course, Jaidit...and I'm not really changing my voting and campaigning behavior anytime soon, at least not over Prop 102 or Prop 8. I offered up my hurt-puppy complaint mostly to spur discussion.

But I do think that all us liberals, black, hispanic, gay, or otherwise, need to learn something from this: we stand together, or we fall together. And we must never take each other's backing for granted, sadly.

Thanks, Jaidit, for your rational thoughts.

[monicaangela]

Don't seek vengance, this is going to be a process. Most latinos are raised catholic and are taught homophobic ideas by the church. Education is what is needed. More and more Hispanics are leaving the catholic church and becoming Evangelicals. I believe just as the younger voters in other minority and white groups are begining to learn tolerance, hispanics/latinos will become educated as well and begin to understand why there is a separation of church and state. I am sure we will all come together in the near future and learn to live and let live. While many citizens of this country are fighting over trivial things, and being swayed by the marriage issue we, our children, and their children are being robbed blind. It's time we learned to stop trying to impose our ideas on others and begin to learn to live together under the auspices of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness for all.

[csavage]

Don't think that the fact that Hispanics are joining evangelical churches means that they will become better informed and less judgmental. Evangelicals are more intolerant of gays than Catholics

[Youhavegottobekiddingme]

My friend,

To do as you suggest is to become like those whom you oppose and violate all that you are.

You cannot sacrifice your principles.
.

.

[uheardme]

White gays did in California and Michigan when both states banned AA. Why not?

[Jaidit]

And, Daniel, how do we reach them? How do we convince the Latinos (and everyone else) that we're all together in a big struggle for equality?

[smag]

As the actor on the boat in the movie JAWS said just as he cited shark..You are going to need a bigger boat. You can pretend that the enemy is the Catholic Church but you are only fooling yourself. Until you come to grips with the rules of the warfare you may win some small skirmishes but you will lose the war. All Christian, Jewish, Mormon, Muslim bibles clearly state that homosexuality is a sin. Your challenge is to get them to care more about your sexual orientation than their God and their faith. Don't be fooled by some representatives of some detonations who embrace homosexuality because they are at odds with the tenants of the faith they claim to believe in. There is a big difference between being religious and an actually practicing Christian, Jew, Mormon or Muslim. There is big difference between tolerance and acceptance. We should tolerate other views until we perceive that they threaten our own norms. Your argument is with God and not members of a religious church. Good luck and God Bless.

[weareas1]

Yeah, we would like them to respect us and want to treat us as equals, but it's really not up to us to change their minds. It's up to the courts to finally force state governments to comply with the U. S. Constitution. The hearts and minds of the people will follow, eventually.

Once the law compels equality, in a generation or two, old attitudes will start to evolve or evaporate. Positive impacts from this legal change (there'll be many) will also have a very dramatic and positive effect on general attitudes about gay people -- not just about same-sex marriage. BTW, I also include equal rights for gays in the US military as an essential component of this necessary legal mandate.

Anyway, attitudes within those churches will also begin to reflect those of the larger and more egalitarian society, and it will happen mostly because of legally mandated same-sex marriage and equal rights within the military, not because we somehow convinced them, through dialogue and reason, to change their attitudes.

Like that of the freshly-vanquished Republican Party, the stock of religious extremism is worth less and less these days. And just like the shattered remains of the GOP, they're gonna have to make some changes if they want to keep having a place at the American table.

[weareas1]

smag wrote: Your argument is with God and not members of a religious church

No, we don't need to discuss this with God. God is the one who is going to have to change His attitude. Not to worry, though. He's done it many times before.