A 365Gay history lesson: last year before the Proposition 8 vote, I wished it failed because I knew a few would jump on the “black people are such homophobes” line. Unfortunately Golden State citizens voted against marriage equality and that tired memo got a lot of play here and elsewhere. Research the site and read the comments. They ranged from folk informing me how “my brothers and sisters” screwed over the LGBT community to suggestions it would be a good idea for gays to discriminate against blacks in retaliation. Look at the stuff if you want.

On this week’s election night, was listening to WNYC, and Nate Silver was being interviewed. I have no issues with Silver, link to 538 all all the time and think he adds to the political discourse. It was early in the night and he was asked to give  thoughts on what would happen in Maine. He noted the dearth of an African-American population in the state and said gay marriage would make it. A strange comment coming from a guy who threw needed cold water on those who  decided to blame the small California black population for the Prop 8 defeat.

Well as we all know marriage rights did not make it in the Pine Tree State and to steal from one of Ta-Nehisi Coates’ readers here is the question for the day:

“Why are posters here, and the media generally, ignoring the fact that these results were driven by Maine’s overwhelming number of black churches?”

For those who don’t get it, the question is rhetorical and ironical.

Before a few of you throw up, let’s get the obvious out of the way. Homophobia, is a problem, no matter where it comes from. Too many blacks adopt a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy when it comes to sexuality. Oh we will groove to the music of Luther Vandross, and wonder out loud why he never found himself a wife. Or we will clap our hands in joyous celebration at the music on church Sunday but go silent when it’s announced the choir director is sick with a “blood disease.”

These realities of black-American life cannot, and should not be ignored; however, too many of us blithely support a narrative where homophobia is somehow  purer  in black and brown communities. Yes we have California, but there is also Washington, DC, and those who leaned on race to explain Prop 8 have been strangely silent on the DC City Council.

From Maine to California, many  black, brown, and white faces will gladly vote against gay marriage. If there is anything that crosses the racial divide it’s bigotry for lesbians and gays.

Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

Neither Bardwell nor the couple immediately returned phone calls from The Associated Press. But Bardwell told the Daily Star of Hammond that he was not a racist.

“I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house,” Bardwell said. “My main concern is for the children.”

Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with blacks and whites, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.

“I don’t do interracial marriages because I don’t want to put children in a situation they didn’t bring on themselves,” Bardwell said. “In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer.”

If he does an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said.

“I try to treat everyone equally,” he said.

Thirty-year-old Beth Humphrey and 32-year-old Terence McKay, both of Hammond, say they will consult the U.S. Justice Department about filing a discrimination complaint.

Humphrey told the newspaper she called Bardwell on Oct. 6 to inquire about getting a marriage license signed. She says Bardwell’s wife told her that Bardwell will not sign marriage licenses for interracial couples.

“It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009,” said American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana attorney Katie Schwartzman. “The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry.”

The ACLU was preparing a letter for the Louisiana Supreme Court, which oversees the state justices of the peace, asking them to investigate Bardwell and see if they can remove him from office, Schwartzman said.

“He knew he was breaking the law, but continued to do it,” Schwartzman said.

According to the clerk of court’s office, application for a marriage license must be made three days before the ceremony because there is a 72-hour waiting period. The applicants are asked if they have previously been married. If so, they must show how the marriage ended, such as divorce.

Other than that, all they need is a birth certificate and Social Security card.

The license fee is $35, and the license must be signed by a Louisiana minister, justice of the peace or judge. The original is returned to the clerk’s office.

Oh sweet Jesus! A little over a week before the big to do in Washington, DC and look at what the folk at Queerty do. Throw out some provocative essay about race, activism, and the “gay community.” Lord help us. Hide the children and bar the doors!

Nakhone Keodara comes out swinging with his “The Whites Can Have LGBT Activism: I Quit.” He argues  the concerns of gays and lesbians of color are never at the table when white gay activists get together, that Anglo gays are always quick to make the argument that discrimination is discrimination without ever giving their white privilege a look over, and that the freedom of all gays and lesbians, no matter their racial background, is not the care of the gay freedom movement.

“We’re frustrated with being shut out, discredited and slandered when we attempt to speak up and represent the interest of the people of color LGBT community. Now I see that it’s fruitless because they just don’t understand that their white privilege has prevented them from having empathy or compassion concerning discrimination the people of color LGBTs have endured even within the LGBT community.”

So in response to this Keodara is calling an end to his gay activism and leaving it to white folks. There are a few things about Keodara’s jeremiad that need to be called out. The whole reasoning behind white privilege is rickety at best. Oh it can get a few applauds, but it it’s too  broad and imprecise to have any meaning, especially now that race lacks its rigid legal codification.

As for “quitting,” that is an option only “the privileged” can consider. Right now I’m reading Slotkin’s No Quarter: The Battle of The Crater, 1864 and if black Union soldiers dealt with the racial barbarity of the Confederate enemy and the perfidy of too many of their white Union comrades, Keodara can keep keeping on with the annoying assumptions of some of his white brethern and sistern.

Keodara also engages in the type of thinking that he critiques Anglos for.

“The Anglo LGBT community refuses to listen to any of the concerns of the people of color within this movement and it will do what it pleases regardless of the consequences.”

If we as gays of color hate it when a few whites describe communities of color with sloppy and general terms, it makes no sense to use that same schedule. Broad strokes are consistently unhelpful, no matter who uses them.

With all of that said though, whenever the topic is race, electronic comment boards do show an ugly underside that at some point has to be talked about. It would have been nice if a few of the folk commenting on Keodora’s words would have kept their white sheets at home, but that is becoming typical for us as a community. When the topic is race ( can we say Prop 8 defeat?) we rev up in overdrive and type out stuff that is ugly. It would be cool if “the community” actually had a conversation about race, but that is never going to happen because we have much invested in this fantasy that we are just one big happy gay family.

.

Labor Day weekend,brings on Southern Decadence, New Orleans paean to gay debauchery and craziness.  One of the acts that has been a Decadence staple, Charles Knipp a/k/a Shirley Q. Liquor, will be a no show and neither Decadence organizers nor Ms. Shirley are saying why.

For those not in the know Liquor is Knipp’s drag stage name and her life is interesting to say the least. She has 19 “chirren” (children), fathers unknown. The names of her children are Bucket, Gonorrhea, Bubblelicious, Cheeto, Orangello, Chlamydia, and Kmartina,  etc., etc. She sings songs wondering about the parentage of her brood, the United Negro Scholarship Fund, and the joys of a toke or two. For Knipp, a white gay man in his 40’s,  to perform as Shirley he dons black-face.

Knipp is convinced his act, a 21st century minstrel show, is about racial healing.

“There are so many pent-up things that black people want to say to white people and vice versa, but we’re all scared to death of offending each other,” Knipp told Rolling Stone a few years back. “I think God’s plan for me is to get right in the middle of all the tension and just make them laugh and say, ‘Oh, my God, I’ve thought that, but nobody’s ever said it out loud.’ There’s gotta be some healing that comes from that. And I truly think that’s why God put me here: to be a healer.”

Racial reconciliation through darky humor?! That is as kooky as saving a village by burning it down. Dear Mr. Knipp: drop me a note and explain how this racial love happens with your face corked up.

It should not be surprising that Knipp’s act has few supporters who are black and gay (although RuPaul is a fan and thinks anyone who calls Knipp’s act racist is not paying attention). Journalist Jasmyne Cannick has written some biting commentary about the man and his act (for some reason Knipp thought it would be precious to superimpose Cannick’s face on the body of a black porn star with huge breasts).

“A man who out of one side of his mouth tells the media that you love you some Black people and was raised by a Black woman and you have nothing but the utmost respect for us, all the while you make a living by degrading us and our race,” Cannick wrote in a letter to RuPaul and Knipp.

I’m no betting man and have no inside information, but this silence from the Knipp camp means he’s planning a big to-do. Because Knipp is convinced he is a healer (I laugh every time I think about that) here is what he will do this year: Shirley Q will be transformed into the “real Michelle Obama” (shrewish and disdainful of J. Crew clothes) and RuPaul will play President Obama as he really is when the lights are off–thuggish with a love for dog fighting. Like I said, I have no inside scoop, but when it happens at Decadence remember where you heard it first. Let the mending begin!

I gave up on McDonald’s after they stopped super sizing stuff (if you don’t love extra McDonald’s fries you want to have Dick Cheney’s baby); however, the love affair is now officially over. Why? Take a gander at this site, 365Black.com.

A few things bother. Where is the shout to us friends of Dorthy who have been carrying the 365 water for awhile (Viacom lawyers: get on that please). Second what is the site for really? Selling Mickey D’s products or black-American culture? Lastly, if you need to mention an African tree (who knew the Baobab tree was such a spiritual symbol) to market yourself to black folks in the US, you are trying too hard.

This is the problem with 365Black. Its blackness is too hip by half. But that is always the issue when Madison Avenue goes after the minority dollar. There is nothing wrong with shilling for the black. gay, Latino, or Asian greenback, but what irks is the sense the lives of the few are encased in some magical world where Baobab tree fruit nourishes our spirit and the ghosts of our ancestors. To be part of a small tribe in this country has many implications, but we are not aliens to the mainstream.

Okay. Fine. The last paragraph is true but I’m mainly upset 365Black does not give us one nod! We were here first! Come on Viacom lawyers. Beat that Ronald McDonald clown down! And Grimace? Bring your fat butt out of the closet!

Some organization called the Black Coalition Against Gay Marriage (anyone heard of these clowns?) sent a letter to the White House, stating that any support from President Barack Obama for same sex marriage would negatively impact his black backers.

“Changing the definition of marriage will have many unintended consequences which will hurt generations to come,” the coalition noted in its missive.

Maybe I would take the BCAGM seriously if it was filled with mainstream organizations. Outside of a few religious group’s (no one should be surprised by that), the only big name in the coalition is CORE, the Congress of Racial Equality. However, CORE is a shell of its former self and its credibility was shot when Roy Innis picked brawling as a political tactic.

BCAGM needs to get its news from an other source. Obama taking on DOMA? Really? The members of the coalition need to spend more time reading gay news site (instead of trolling the net looking for gay porn) because they might learn a thing or two. By the way: nothing wrong with using the net for porn viewing.

We’ve talked about the combination of race, sexuality, and marriage ever since the Proposition 8 vote in November so there is not anything new to add. The coalition has a point. If Obama pushes for the dismantling of DOMA, he will lose a few religious black votes; however, those votes will be quickly replaced. Subtraction by addition.

If we want to learn how to navigate the race, sexuality, and marriage waters we should study what happened in Washington, DC. A predominantly black city that came out for marriage rights despite the yammering of a few.

The Human Rights Campaign has stepped into the hornet’s nest of  identity with a new report called “At the Intersection: Race, Sexuality and Gender.” The organization is even having an online conversation about the report today.

The study’s findings are not that earth shattering, especially if you have been paying attention to the “community” chatter since the defeat of Proposition 8. Gays and lesbians  of color experience their lives primarily through the lens of race and gender. LGBT people of color are simultaneously accepted and rejected by their communities. Brown and black gays and lesbians see no difference in racism and sexism exhibited by gays or straights.

The report isn’t all downer. It suggests bridges can be built on work against hate crimes and job discrimination. How the HRC study will be received is any one’s guess. I  think it will come and go with nary a whimper. Mainly because we would rather talk noise about community which is easy.

To hike my funk meter for a minute, is any one really shocked by this? Gays and lesbians of color have been saying stuff like this for ages, ages, and ages. And precious little has changed. And we all know how it will go here. Some  will call me a racist and tell me to get help. Others will wonder why 365 has turned into ghetto news central , and a few will quote nuttiness espoused by a black friend (word to the wise: just because your colored friend says it, it ain’t necessarily so).

Race talk brings out the crazy in all of us ; however, let’s put the crazy down  and actually hear each other. One way to start is to let go of the  innocence shields that always pop up when the topic is color.

1. Slogging through The Brothers Karamazov. Hopefully will be done in three more weeks. Right now all I can say is Grushenka was not worth the effort.

2. Still no one in custody for the murder of three at a Tel Aviv gay and lesbian center. There might have been a personal, not political, motive.

3. Glad the media stopped talking about the “beer summit.” Wish the story was handled  better, but when the (perceived) topic is race there are only so many narratives we like to hear.

4. If you call a  black person a “jungle monkey”  you are not allowed to announce how utterly free of racist animus your soul is.

5. Any summer  movie suggestions?

6. The suspect in the murder of sailor  August Provost, III killed himself. Not sure there will ever be a satisfactory answer to why Provost was murdered.

7. Blueberries are expensive this summer.

8. The leader of the “birther movement” is nutty and needs a cosmetic adviser. And birther crazies? Please leave no comments. Just go fix your tin foil hats.

9. What will I do now that the Olberman and O’Reilly feud is kaput? These two knot heads having a beef is why I don’t miss TV.

10. I’ve said this before, but it needs repeating . Spent the weekend watching season one of  The Wire. Anyone who didn’t nominate the show for an Emmy is a moron.

Health care reform. Two wars (you all better be reading the articles of Michael Yon), an economy that gives everyone the shakes. Given all this the media kept its eye on one word used by President Barack Obama in his most recent press conference.

On Wednesday night, the president was asked about Henry L. Gates’ run in with the Cambridge police. He admitted his bias upfront, described the incident, and noted Cambridge officers “acted stupidly.” The press jumped on that word and to hear some tell it Obama has something against the police.

Getting stupid on Obama’s use of the word stupid is part of the whole “give the police the benefit of the doubt” ethos. No one denies police work is a difficult job, filled with hazards of the highest order. However, police do make mistakes and often times act without thought. Don’t believe? Ask Chad Gibson what he thinks about the perfectibility of the police. If you don’t trust him what about Ryan Moats? He plays professional football and was pulled over by an officer. His crime? Rolling through a red light. Why? his mother-in-law was dying.

Okay, Moats asked for the officer’s abuse. He wasn’t being respectful enough to the cop,  who at one point in the conversation says “I can screw you over.” Want another example? How about the Oakland policeman  who killed a man on a train platform. Some of you will argue the guy didn’t follow the officer’s orders like a good citizen should. Well Oscar Grant was lying face down on the ground, but  Officer  (now ex) Johannes Mehserle pumped bullets in him anyway. Can’t wait to see how that is justified!

For the record and it irks me this has to be said,  but I know how some play here at 365: there is no suggestion from me the man who arrested Gates, Sergeant James M. Crowley, is a racist. From all accounts he is good at his job and a decent enough fellow. Yet, even after reading  his report a few times (that has been contradicted by Gates), I’m still confused why he felt the need to arrest the professor  in his house (and yes Virgina: the porch is part of the house).

It’s  hypocritical of  me to dog out the media about “Gate-gate” as I blather on about it also, so I’m done. However, this has to be said. While the Cambridge kabuki is entertaining, it  keeps us away from our serious law and order troubles. I’m willing to bet Crowley, Gates, and Obama would all agree on that.

Here is what you need to know about my bias in this story. There is a picture of Henry Louis Gates on my wall. He is standing at a lectern; I’m behind him and just introduced him at a high-school assembly (for a number of years I corrupted young minds as an English teacher).

My introduction of the professor, who had just accepted a position at Harvard University, was the type of claptrap you get from folks who fawn a bit too much. I have a Gates section in my book collection and can’t think of a time when I didn’t defend him (for those not in the know, Gates is a controversial figure to a few African-American Studies scholars).

With my preconceptions out in the open here is the tale: Gates was arrested last week for thinking he could be “loud and tumultuous” in his own home. After returning from China, where he was filming a documentary for PBS, the scholar gets to his home door. It’s not working and he is leaning into it to get it open, with the assistance of his cab driver. A neighbor sees this, is worried a crime is being committed and calls the police. When an officer arrives, Gates is on the phone calling the leasing agency about the broken door. The constable demands the professor come outside. Gates declines. The policeman enters the home, but even after proving he was in the right place, Gates still gets the handcuffs.

According to the police report, Gates comes off as uncooperative. He yells at the officer and accuses him of racial bias. Some will say this whole incident is Gates’ fault. If he had only followed police orders, everything would have turned out fine. The taking orders from the police line works for a small-time political blogger (freelance at that); however, a Harvard scholar, with books and such behind him, has the right to get funky when his very existence is called into question after he gets home from a trip. Sure that standard should apply to everyone, but we live in a world that rarely matches our rhetorical skills.

The debate about this will more than likely turn predictable. Those convinced America is now in some post-racial hue, will see this as an unfortunate encounter that could have been defused. Others, and I include myself in this camp, will marvel that even a black man with a PhD has to account for his status. In his own home (walking the streets is a whole different matter). Freedom papers anyone?

UPDATE: The charges against Gates have been dropped. The professor and the Middlesex District Attorney’s office issued a joint statement calling last week’s mess “regrettable and unfortunate.”

UPDATE 2: Gates is interviewed by The Root (he is the site’s editor-in-chief) and contradicts much of the police report. Says it was impossible for him to have yelled at the officer due to “a severe bronchial infection” he contracted in China.