Skip to main content

Is the White Gay Power Elite Racist?

Yes according to a black gay.

http://orvillelloyddouglas.wordpress.com/2008/11/07/dan-savage-is-a-racist-typical-white-gay-male/

Dan Savage Is A Racist Typical Of White Gay Power Elite In North America


Well Dan Savage is at it again he is blaming the African American community in the state of California for voting for prop 8. Savage utilizes statistics that can be manipulated to advance his anti black agenda by starting that since 70% of blacks in the state of California voted for prop 8 automatically means all blacks are homophobic. Savage pathetic and ludicrous attempts to blame African Americans for voting for prop 8 only underscores the incredible racism some white gays have for black people. Only 6.2% of California’s population is African American.

According to exit polls 53% of Hispanic voters also voted for prop 8 does this mean that hispanics are suddenly pro gay? Also, there are more hispanics that live in California then blacks. Of course the statistic Savage loves is the fact 43% of white voters voted for prop 8. However, there is a larger white population in California then African American. Savage’s anger is not only misplaced it demonstrates his own bigotry.

It is the tired agenda of the white gay power elite to attempt to brand blacks as anti gay. However, when will the white gay elite such as Dan Savage admit they are anti black? When will the gay magazines such as Out or the Advocate publish articles about their anti black agenda?

Where was Dan Savage when the white gay comedian Charles Knipp discriminated against African Americans in California with his racist comedy act as routine as Shirley Q Liquor? Where was GLAAD? When have the white gay power elite ever supported African American causes and issues? Yet suddenly, white homosexuals demand support from blacks?

Savage’s outburst is typical of the white gay power elite in North America they think blacks owe them something for supporting Obama. However, by attacking the black communities this will not advance their agenda. Savage’s outburst will only create even more hostility and of course more friction and miscommunication. Another quandary is some communities of colour unfortunately view homosexuality as a part of white privilege and a part of whiteness. The image society still has of gay people is that all gay people are white. Some people still believe is that to be “gay” means to be “white”. Once again gays of colour are displaced due to racism.

In order to bridge the gap between the white gays and black heterosexuals of course are the black gay activists. Black heterosexual people will not listen to Dan Savage all they will see is yet again another white man with white skin privilege. Although Dan Savage is a homosexual he is still a white male and still a part of the white American majority. The only form of discrimination white homosexuals encounter is due to their sexual orientation.

Of course, Savage ignores the fact that the majority of people that voted for prop 8 were drum roll please….white Americans. The question remains why doesn’t Dan Savage challenge the homophobia in white heterosexual culture? The people in the power structure that create the anti gay marriage laws and discriminate against gays through legal channels are not African Americans but whites. Therefore, Dan Savage’s anger is misplaced. Savage should be challenging the white heterosexual community yet he chooses not to since they are the ones with the political power to discriminate against gays and lesbians.

Savage refuses to challenge white culture about the deleterious homophobia. Instead, Savage chooses to paint his brush with venom by attacking blacks because since he is a white male he believes he can “patronize” and “preach” to blacks about tolerance. However, Savage’s anger just proves he is a part of the problem not the solution.

Why is Savage attacking African Americans? The reason is due to white male skin privilege an issue that the powerful white elite in the United States refuse to acknowledge. White gay men in America although they are gay they still have the social signifiers of gender and race due to being white and male. Savage also of course does not challenge the pernicious racism in the American gay community against gays of colour.

Of course there is homophobia in African American communities but there is also homophobia in white culture, Asian American culture, Native American culture as well. Just because the USA suddenly elected their first black president Barack Obama does not mean heterosexual African Americans are going to support white homosexuals. Also, the prop 8 is an issue for the state of California it is not a federal issue. Why doesn’t Dan Savage challege the homophobia of religious white people in the state of California? After all, there are more whites that live in California then blacks. What about Hispanic Americans many of them also did support prop 8.

If white gays want the support of communities of colour they first must acknowledge and deal with the pernicious racism within the gay commmunity. Although I am not American I have spoken to African American gays and lesbians they tell me Dan Savage’s attitude is typical of white gay America.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...