Black People are Homophobic!

Why? We saw it in California with devastating repercussions. I even heard the “gangster” individuals in my neighborhood bragging about how they (a) voted for the first time because of Barack Obama, and (b) how they voted Yes on Prop 102, Arizona’s version of California’s Prop 8. When I asked these moronic tits why they voted that way, they merely responded, “'Cause that shit is disgusting, yo.” or “‘Cause I ain’t no muthafuckin’ fag!”

So I am now thoroughly scared. We now have this huge voting block in America that seems to have just now realized what sort of power they have, as if we weren’t already telling them before to get out and vote. And guess what. They’re all a bunch of idiots. That’s right America, we just woke a giant throng of homophobic retards, we just flashed continuous billboards and commercials of P. Diddy telling these people to get out and vote. And they have. And they voted for Barack Obama–no matter how much I personally support him–merely because he’s black, and they voted for Props 102 & 8 merely because they “ain’t no muthafuckin’ fag[s]!”

I mean, for God’s sakes, how can you sit there and rightfully argue against racial discrimination, but then instantly turn around and start spewing the same anti-gay bullshit rich, white Republicans are preaching? Jesus Christ! What would MLK think? That’s my new motto: WWMLKT? I can assure you, he’d be fucking disgusted with his people. Bill Cosby is. I can only hope Obama secretly feels the same way.

And I just now saw a commercial trying to sell me Barack Obama collectors’ coins and I think I need to roll another joint. ](*,)

Hi Simulacra,

This is what our entire nation has been doing since equal rights were granted to blacks…

The sad part about a democracy is that dumb people can vote. I’d reckon most people don’t have good reasons behind why they vote the way they do. And you’re right, it is scary.

or less likely to lie (to themselves and then to interviewers.)

I think in light of the evidence you present, your thread title may be just a bit of an overgeneralisation.

Homophobic may be a slight exaggeration, but demographically blacks are far less accepting of homosexuality than are whites. Which is amusing since presumably the percentage of gay blacks is about the same as for other races.

faust is right by the way, mucho generalisation-o
everyone who has the right to vote has it because they are free. free to vote for whatever reason they like.

reasoned out ideas do not get one vote
one person get’s one vote.
to them perhaps their ability to make an input, thought out or otherwise, is important.
frankly you have no right to merit anyones reason for voting but your own.

In my opinion, elections are a form of public entertainment, like any other, like football.
Why do people from Green Bay support the Packers.
Why do Geordies support Newcastle Utd.
Why do people from Dublin support the Dubs.
(Thought I’d Cater to all the footballs)

It’s not as if supporters weigh pros and cons and then choose their team.
For the vast majority of people, loyalty to a sports team, as well as politics is a matter of circumstance.
That’s why red and blue states mostly stay the same except for the few that are contestable.

I know that, Phaed. But saying that a cohort that is 30% homophobic is not homophobic and that a cohort that is 70% homophobic is homophobic (for instance) is not particularly useful.

First off, I really like that allegory. And secondly, the reason I could never get into sports is for exactly that same reason. I never knew who to root (i.e., “vote”) for because I thought it rather silly to root for a team simply because they’re from my town or state… or ethnicity.

I am in no way degrading everybody’s right to vote, that is extremely important, I’m venting over the impetuousness of some voters. It makes my vote seem all that much more useless. Oh well, at least when the world blows up, I’ll get a front row seat…

Right, I mean, granted, whites have their fair share of homophobes–amongst other things–but that isn’t to say there isn’t a significance to African American homophobia. It has clearly made an impact in California, and, in my opinion, has robbed Californian gays of their basic rights. I mean, maybe that’s just my bias, considering that I think it’s an outrage in itself that gays still aren’t treated equally, but for fuck’s sakes, of all people, black people should be able to relate with that most!

Shouldn’t black people rise up, as they used to proclaim they would once do? Sure, there’s Barack Obama, but it would seem to me that black people, being the most recent and blatant case of long-standing civil rights infringement and oppression, would take it upon themselves to fight for the civil rights of similarly oppressed peoples, not just themselves. They had such a chance to be the crusaders of civil rights, and at least try to accomplish a dream. It seems, though, that that dream is dead in the ground, suffocated by kitschy pop-culture amusement, and the gaudiness of an exploited people.

I don’t know the whys and wherefores of this, but blacks seem to rend to the fundamentalist religions.

That fact may be more important than skin color itself.

Despite all the public rhetoric, it might just be that some blacks think of themselves as Christian before they think of themselves as black.

I think God would want it that way.

While I see the logic in that, I believe that this causality, while a contributing factor, is less pertinent than cultural values. In inner city culture, of which just so happens to be immensely populated by blacks (as well as hispanics), in itself carries an extreme reverence for masculinity and machismo.

There have been many sociological studies aimed at explaining this phenomena, and one theory, amongst many, is that such inner city societies are plagued with rampant single-mother families. Father-figures, in their lack of presence in the children’s lives, as this theory supposes, leave a huge void that is often times overcompensated for by the almost ritualistic reverence for gangsters, pimps, and drug-dealers, who are the nearest and most accessible father-figures for these children to latch on to. It seems that this hyper-masculinity also breeds homophobic tendencies. Oddly enough, these hyper-masculine inner city males seem to exhibit many feminine and/or metrosexual qualities such as extreme cleanliness as well as attraction to fashionable attire.

I can buy into that part-way.

Black men and white gay men do share two attributes - nice shoes and the desire to avoid shortening of their first names.

But the idea that your average inner-city youth admires gangsters per se is unlikely true. I think your average inner-city youth merely fears them. The myth you are sharing here is more likely a projection of white people’s fascination with mafia movies.

I did not grow up in a major city, but it was big enough to have gangbangers. As a kid, you tend to admire them until you meet them.

But wouldn’t you agree that that is part of revering one’s father? I’m not saying it is a necessity to fear one’s father, but most kids I know/knew were more afraid of disappointing their father (not necessarily for abusive reasons; more for scowling reasons) than they were their mother. I wouldn’t know, up until I was 11, I grew up in a single-mother household, so it had always been my mother’s jurisdiction to caste judgment and, thusly, punishment.

It just seems to me that reverence has both admiration and fear hand-in-hand. We constantly see in TV shows mothers telling there misbehaving children “Wait until your father comes home”. Whether the father is in fact a harsher judge than the mother is irrelevant (often times they’re more lenient), what is important is the innate fear of disappointing our fathers. We all know our mothers will love us no matter what, their love is a lot more unconditional than a fathers, hence the intrinsic fear of possibly losing a father’s love. If you look at cases of murder, often times the mother will continue loving their murdering offspring, no matter how blatantly guilty, while the father is often times much more willing to disown or disavow a relationship with that person. Even Christians admittedly both love and fear their “Father”. It’s an issue of appeasement as well as modeling behavior. That’s reverence; fear and admiration.

Various junctures in time will show instances of humans being attracted to that which they fear. If we recoiled from fear absolutely, we would never go to or, for that matter, make horror films.

Thus, a child who looks up to gangbangers as father-figures will, of course, fear them, but they also model their behavior after them; that is, they wish to become them. Which is why they so often do.

Mebbe - but not all black kids grow up in a ghetto anymore. Do the stats hold up for college-educated, middleclass blacks?

My point is that it’s easy to use statistics to make a point - “what black people think” might be “what poor people think”, “what non-college-educated people think”, “what Baptists and Nation of Islam members think” - in other words, might not be what black people think at all.

Undoubtedly, that’s quite truthful. In fact, he U.S. Census Bureau says this:

A sound argument that African Americans don’t comprise enough of a percentage of American poverty to be labeled as such, sure. Not all black people think this way, for certain. Thus, I’d quite readily change this thread’s title to Poor Urban Culture is Homophobic! for political correctness’ sake.

However, all I was doing was using the same vernacular so commonly used by black people today. They’re often times less PC about themselves as we are. For instance, if you’re an upper-class rock-and-roll-loving African American who doesn’t exude the same urban cultural trends as other black people, you aren’t considered “black” or at least “black enough” by their own standards. They’ve attributed “poor urban culture” to be the same as “black culture” because so much of “poor urban culture” is in fact black.

So one could, according their own vocabulary, say Black Culture is Homophobic! which distances itself from actual “black people”. After all, I am almost 100% Spanish, but I in know way consider myself a member what would commonly be considered “Spanish culture”. It’s a matter of identification, and if you identify yourself with “black culture”, whether you’re black or not, your are still identifying yourself with its many vices, amongst its virtues.

Thus, if you’re black but don’t consider yourself an active member of “black culture”, you wouldn’t have to worry. If you’re black and do consider yourself a member of “black culture” yet disagree with its homophobic tendencies, you would, as far as I’m concerned, have a moral obligation to help sway your culture in a direction your deem to be more virtuous, i.e., not hating gay people. As an active member of any culture, like any democracy, your voice emanates throughout and can often times bring change. (Why does that sound familiar?)

Well, I’m not trying to be PC, I’m just trying to understand how your claim actually applies to the electorate.

Presidents have not historically done much either way about gay rights, besides lip service. And if urban blacks have voted solely because Obama ran, they won’t vote again for four years. I have a feeling that gay rights advocates can get around that.