White as Milk: Proposition 8 and the Cultural Politics of Gay Rights
Suzanne Lenon is Assistant Professor in the et une proximité à la race blanche, qui lie ce Department of Women and Gender Studies, moment légal et culturel ensemble. Cet article University of Lethbridge. examine l’union des représentations norma- tives racialisées du film, et la racialisation de Abstract l’homophobie qui advient des deux côtés du As part of the U.S. federal elections in Nov- débat sur Proposition 8, un débat qui conti- ember 2008, voters in California narrowly nue le prolongement de la fraction de la race, passed Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that comme une séparation de la sexualité au eliminated same-sex marriage rights in that sein des politiques gaies et lesbiennes. state. Against this political-legal backdrop, the movie Milk, based on the life of gay activist Harvey Milk, was released to audiences across North America. Proposition 8 and its As part of the November 2008 federal aftermath infused social and cultural meaning elections in the United States (U.S.), voters in into the critical acclaim Milk publicly received, California narrowly passed a ballot initiative and the movie itself became a way to both eliminating same-sex marriage rights in galvanize and anchor support for gay (mar- that state. Six months earlier, the California riage) rights. I contend that there is a particu- Supreme Court had ruled that the state’s law lar racialization of queer sexuality and prox- prohibiting same-sex marriage was unconsti- imity to whiteness that links this moment of tutional under the privacy, due process, and law and culture together. The paper exam- equal protection guarantees of the California 1 ines the “knitted-togetherness” of the film’s Constitution. By a 52 to 48 per cent margin, racially normative representations and the Proposition 8 overturned this decision and racializing of homophobia that occurred on added a new section to California’s constitu- both sides of the Proposition 8 debate, one tion, limiting the definition of marriage to a that continues the protracted fractioning of union between a man and a woman. Almost race as separate from sexuality within main- immediately, opponents challenged Propos- stream lesbian/gay politics. ition 8 as an illegal revision because it signifi- cantly altered the equal protection measures Résumé guaranteed by the Constitution. Following a Dans le cadre des élections fédérales amér- judicial review, in May 2009, the California icaines de novembre 2008, les électeurs en Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8 as a Californie ont réussi à faire passer de jus- valid constitutional amendment; however, it tesse la Proposition 8, une initiative de scrutin also ruled that Proposition 8 would not qui a éliminé les droits des personnes ayant retroactively invalidate the estimated 18,000 effectué un mariage de même sexe dans cet same-sex marriages performed in California état. Le film Milk, réalisé contre cet environ- between June and November 2008. Two nement politiquement légal, et basé sur la vie same-sex couples, with the legal support of du militant Harvey Milk, est sorti sur les the American Foundation for Equal Rights, grands écrans en Amérique du Nord. Suite à filed a federal district court challenge on the 2 la sortie Proposition 8, ont infusé un sens heels of this judgment. In August 2010, the social et culturel dans au succès publique de court released its decision in which it was Milk. Le film est lui-même devenu un moyen determined that Proposition 8 did indeed vio- de galvaniser et d’ancrer du support pour le late equal protection guarantees under the droit du mariage gai. J’affirme qu’il y a une U.S. Constitution and that same-sex couples racialisation particulière de la sexualité gaie, should be allowed to marry again in Califor-
44 www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 nia. Although vigorously appealed by pro- tend that it is whiteness as a relation of power ponents of Proposition 8, the Supreme Court that enables the politico-legal event of Prop- of the United States issued a ruling in June osition 8 and the cultural text of the movie to 2013 that found the Proposition unconstitu- find and construct meaning for, and in, each tional. Same-sex marriage is now (again) other. legal in California.3 Against the politico-legal backdrop of “How Timely Milk Feels”: Galvanizing the success of Proposition 8, a critically Legal Struggle through Cultural Text acclaimed feature film entitled Milk (2008) There are a number of similarities be- was released to audiences across North tween the campaign chronicled in the movie America. Directed by Gus Van Sant, the and the “real life” campaign over Proposition movie focuses on the final eight years of the 8: both were nationally watched campaigns life of Harvey Milk, the first openly gay and close in the polls; both figured children politician elected to office in the U.S. Support- and schools as a central concern; both politic- ers of same-sex marriage sought to make a al moments featured Republican governors direct link between the activist efforts to (Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger) challenge Proposition 8 and the movie’s plot siding with gay Californians; and both anti- line of the 1978 political campaign to defeat Proposition 8 and anti-Proposition 6 linked Proposition 6, an initiative on the California support of “gay rights” with imaginings of state ballot which would have banned les- what “America” stands for. Indeed, it is worth bians and gay men from working in Califor- noting that the website of the American Foun- nia’s public schools. dation for Equal Rights does not feature any In this paper, I offer a critical analysis conventional gay iconography (rainbow flag, of Milk as a cultural text that actively con- pink triangle), but rather the American flag, a structs racialized meaning; that is, I argue signal to homonationalist inflections under- that it functions as a contemporary site where pinning this gay rights legal project. gay is made white. Here, I follow a method The movie also contains a ready- offered by Melani McAllister (2001, 5) who made inspirational message for contemporary argues that we need to position cultural texts activists. Fearing a loss over Proposition 6, in history as active producers of meaning, Sean Penn (as Harvey Milk) says to fellow rather than assuming they merely reflect or activist Cleve Jones (played by Emile Hirsch), reproduce some pre-existing social reality. “If this thing passes, fight the hell back.” Anti- She argues that the cultural field exists in Proposition 8 activism was grounded in this continuous relationship with other fields in the spirit in a number of ways. Significantly, the larger social system, and thus cultural pro- movie’s release was carefully timed. An inter- ductions are part of concrete debates of their view with Gus Van Sant reveals the political time. In this way, analysis of cultural artifacts implications of the movie’s various release becomes less about what these texts may dates4: mean than how they participate in the socio- political world. The method she suggests is to By the time the film comes out, the election will be examine the “knitted-togetherness” of culture over, although we will be having screenings, and politics, that is, to explore the ways in including the big opening at the Castro, before the which world events and cultural texts con- election. I hope that some of this will have some struct meanings for each other (82). Knitting effect on California’s Proposition 8…We thought the politics of Proposition 8 together with the about whether to release the film before the movie underscores the ways in which law and election, especially if it could affect Prop 8. The culture deeply constitute one other. Propos- end decision was not to have the film speaking ition 8 and its aftermath breathed social and directly to the election, because if it was seen to be cultural meaning into the critical acclaim Milk just about the election that might take away its received, and the movie itself became a way chance of having a life after the election. We to rouse and anchor support for gay (mar- decided to straddle the election, to have the riage) rights. More than this, though, I con-
www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 45 opening affect the election and the release be after Harvey’s focus was human rights and therefore the election. (Bowen 2008) limitless. (Travers 2008)
Furthermore, both Sean Penn (best actor) A discussion thread about Milk on the and Dustin Lance Black (best original screen- online LGBTQ activist network
46 www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 “gay liberation” as almost exclusively white ition 6 campaign, and, in the following scene, and male. There are neither queer bodies of Sean Penn’s voice-over as Harvey Milk says, colour nor any women visible in the movie’s “Jack was gone. I didn’t have any time to opening footage of arrests. This is a sig- mourn. There was no choice. I had to keep nificant misrepresentation as well as mis- on, keep on fighting” (Milk 2008). Towards remembering of genealogies of the birth(s) of the end of the film, Milk has a telephone the gay liberation movement, given that drag conversation with Smith in the early morning queens and people of colour led the 1969 of the day that he is assassinated. The con- Stonewall revolt and riots and ultimately versation hints at an abiding affection and the made a figure like Harvey Milk possible possibility of rekindling the relationship were it (Retzloff 2007; Stryker 2008).5 Similarly, we not for Milk’s untimely death. One way to in- meet only one lesbian in the movie (Anne terpret this is that, in contrast to his relation- Kronenberg, played by Canadian actor Alison ship with the troubled and volatile Lira, Milk’s Pill), when in fact a vibrant lesbian community relationship with Scott Smith is offered as true existed in San Francisco at the time. Further- love. While biographies of Harvey Milk do more, as Harvey Milk’s campaign manager, point to such aspects of Lira’s personality and Kronenberg herself was key to forging alli- the catty humorous exchange between Milk ances with lesbian communities that gained and Wong might indicate a form of inclusion Milk his political support and that became part within Milk’s close network of political ad- of the large grassroots movement to defeat visors, such representations compound the Proposition 6 (Epstein 1984; Shilts 1982). already striking marginal presence of (queer) Further compounding the gendered characters of colour in the movie, given the and racial erasures of the movie’s opening historical record. The movie’s overarching sequence is the marginalization of (queer) narrative frame of a movement coming into characters of colour with speaking roles and political and social visibility, recounted without therefore as substantial characters in the film the tangible presence of bodies of colour or as a whole. There is only one African where such bodies mediate the whiteness of American man who delivers a single line in gay male self-determination, produces an er- the movie as he walks past Harvey Milk’s roneous discursive construct that equates storefront during an election campaign, say- gay as white. ing, “Gonna win this time, Milk?” In another Beyond these examples of individual scene, the (straight) character Michael Wong, characters, there is another more systematic one of Harvey Milk’s key political advisors representation of a gay political movement as (played by Kelvin Yu), is chastised by Milk white and male—that of the “phone tree” with the line, “Don’t you have someone’s scene. As the repeal of various gay rights laundry to do?” (referencing the classic protection ordinances in municipalities across stereotype of a Chinese laundry worker); the United States compounds the struggle Wong’s response to Milk, “Shouldn’t you be against Proposition 6, this particular scene at a hairdressing convention?” is one of his features Cleve Jones telephoning a friend two substantive lines in the entire movie (Milk whose image appears in a small box at the 2008). As Harvey Milk’s second lover in the top right of the screen: “Hey, we’re losing film, Jack Lira, a Latino man, is portrayed as Wichita; so, rally tonight, sundown, at Market needy, jealous, emotionally unstable, and a and Castro, OK?” They both hang up and the problem to Milk’s political aspirations; little or screen then multiplies into nearly 100 small no validity is given to their relationship. When boxes of white men phoning each other to Milk’s former lover Scott Smith (played by spread word of the rally. The point that I want James Franco) tells Milk that he can do to emphasize here are the terms through better, with a head nod to Jack, the response which people of colour are included in the is, “When I come home to Jack, I don’t have movie’s cinematic representations, that is, to talk politics; I don’t have to talk intelligently; either as a marginal presence or altogether I don’t have to talk at all.” Significantly, Lira absent. Such terms have the effect of kills himself in the midst of the anti-Propos- abstracting such bodies from a contemporary
www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 47 cultural retelling of a particular historical mo- actual love stories…I just thought it was an oppor- ment.6 This racial otherness functions to nor- tunity to get more into the personal stories—of malize white gay male sexuality to a main- what it was to be gay in that transformative time.” stream audience, where the self-determining (Cline 2009). white gay activist emerges out of the shad- ows of the closet into his rightful place in The focus on love stories is an inter- history. The metaphor of the closet, however, esting one given the ubiquitous appeal to love spatially and temporally suggests access to and romance in contemporary struggles for privacy not collectively experienced by all lesbian and gay rights, a far cry from trans- sexual minorities (Perez 2005, 177). The pri- gressive gay liberation politics of the 1970s vacy this metaphor takes for granted requires which sought to wrest and unshackle sex specific economic, cultural, and familial cir- from love (Manalansan 2007; Patton 1998). cumstances. Similarly, the “coming out” An intriguing sidenote to this arose in June metaphor suggests a kind of mobility not 2009, when photos of Black allegedly having universally available. Coming out promises unsafe sex appeared and circulated on the liberation and celebrates a form of freedom Internet. A short article appearing in The and self-determination, both of which are Advocate that same month, however, states premised on the property of whiteness. These that, “the pictures won’t stand in the way of two canonical narratives of the closet and the Oscar winner’s work in support of gay coming out, Perez argues, “violently excludes rights.” Black is quoted in this article as or includes the subjects it names according to saying, “More important than the embarrass- their access to specific kinds of privacy, prop- ment of this incident is the misleading mes- erty, and mobility” (178; see also Charania sage these images send. I apologize and 2005 and Ross 2005). As Spade and Willse cannot emphasize enough the importance of (2009) observe, focusing on Harvey Milk as responsible sexual practices” (2009). The re- an individual not only gives the contemporary pentant tone, as if he can no longer be a lesbian/gay/queer movement a white idol, but spokesperson for same-sex marriage, is also canonizes a certain white gay male hist- deeply telling of the extent to which both the ory as the story of queer liberation. advocacy for, and the meaning of, “gay What I am problematizing here is the rights” evince notions of respectability, where movie’s screenplay and not Milk himself; in safe sex is the civic obligation of the “good fact, it is instructive to watch the 1984 docu- gay” citizen (Patton 1998, 363). mentary The Times of Harvey Milk alongside The racialized terms produced by the this Hollywood retelling, as it reveals the film are part of, and I would argue, contribute great extent to which Milk sought to establish to, a larger socio-political context—its “world alliances and coalitions with a wide variety of politics” (McAllister 2001)—in which both communities, including communities of col- lesbian/gay/ queer activisms and seemingly our. There is, in fact, a telling scene in the progressive Western state discourses of anti- movie where the character of Milk asserts, “I homophobia racialize “pro-gay” and anti- am not a candidate. I am part of a movement. homophobia discourse as white. Within this The movement is the candidate” (Milk 2008). discursive terrain, people and communities Yet in an interview discussing the writing of racialized as, for example, Muslim become his screenplay for the film’s production, marked as over(t)ly homophobic, and the Dustin Lance Black remarked, freedom to be “out” as gay or lesbian becomes a marker in the distance between “The thing I wanted to do in the script was get barbarism and civilization in the post 9/11 much more personal. The documentary doesn’t geopolitical context (in the British context, see have most of the stories that I was drawn to. It Haritaworn, Tauqir, and Erdem 2008 and doesn’t have Cleve Jones’ story, which is a father- Douglas, Jivraj, and Lamble 2011; in the son story, which I related to the most. And it Canadian context, Lenon 2008; and in the doesn’t have Scott Smith and Harvey’s story. It Dutch context, El-Tayeb 2012; Jivraj and de doesn’t have Jack Lira. It doesn’t have any of the Jong 2011). Queer anti-racist scholarship and
48 www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 activisms delineate the thick relationship be- education, showing results that, the more tween access to citizenship rights (e.g., mar- white people living in a precinct, the more riage) for (some) lesbians and gay men, the likely that precinct was to vote against the war on terror, and the racisms that accom- proposition (and thus for same-sex marriage); pany it. As Jasbir Puar (2007) has argued, the opposite was true for precincts with many the (limited) welcome of lesbian/gay/queer Asian or African American residents. A study subjects into market and legislative registers released by the National Lesbian and Gay is enabled only through a parallel process of Task Force, however, found quite different a queer necropolitics, that is, targeting queer- results. By combining precinct-level election ly raced bodies for dying. Haritaworn, Tauqir, returns, demographic data, and a survey of and Erdem (2008, 79) track the hegemonic California voters, the authors’ analysis in- whiteness of mainstream queer activism in dicates that party identification, religiosity, Britain and its participation in the construction and age had a much greater impact on the of Muslim homophobia. Western nation states outcome than any other voter characteristics, claiming gender equality and “gay rights” as such as race. Their data suggests that, symbols of their modernity, the authors among Californians who attend religious ser- argue, signals not progress in gender and vices at least weekly, support for Proposi- sexual politics, but rather a regression in tion 8 was nearly uniform across all racial and racial politics. Transformed into indicators of ethnic groups. Furthermore, in contrast to Western values, “gay rights” (as well as gen- the NEP exit poll, their data suggests that der equality) are held up as measures of African American support for Proposition 8 civilized modernity in a transnational sphere, was in the range of 57 per cent, not the 70 thereby playing an intrinsic role in the re- per cent that was initially reported (Egan and making of a white family of nations as part of Sherrill 2009). the “war against terror” (Arat-Koç 2010; Tho- What is of interest here are not the bani 2007). The concerted deployment of re- numbers per se, but rather that such an spect for gay rights as a marker of distinction explanatory strategy belies the complexity of between the modern civility of the West and reasons for the failure of the “No on 8” cam- “backwardness” of Islam, for example, is a paign. Indeed, one of the strongest critiques terrain shared by diverse actors and various directed at this campaign was that its organiz- “sides” of the political spectrum, including ational structure had little or no accountability forms of lesbian/gay/queer political organ- or transparency to wider LGBT communities izing. Such homonationalism breathes new (Marriage Equality USA 2009, 2; see also life into, and revives, long histories of the Ehrenreich 2008 and McKinley 2008). deployment of gender and sexuality in imper- Moreover, directives given to queer of colour ial and racist projects (Douglas, Jivraj, and organizations were followed through with Lamble 2011; Puar 2007). limited financial and material resources to do The politics of Proposition 8 also con- the work, despite raising an estimated $43 tribute to this racializing of pro-gay/anti- million (Shin 2009, 4). Additionally, there was homophobia discourse. In its aftermath, many a lack of advertising in communities of colour commentators latched onto the apparently other than a last-minute public service an- high numbers of African Americans and other nouncement featuring a voice-over by Sam- communities of colour who voted for Propos- uel L. Jackson (but not his image) entitled ition 8 (and thus against same-sex marriage), “Proposition 8 is Discrimination,” which drew as announced by media reports of exit polls. analogies between marriage equality and The National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll other historical exclusions of citizenship claimed, for example, that 70 per cent of (Marriage Equality USA 2009, 5, 7). While or- black voters supported Proposition 8 (Egan ganizations representing communities of col- and Sherrill 2009, 9). The San Francisco our were included as coalition partners, this Chronicle (Knight 2008) reported on a diversity was not for the most part demon- demographic breakdown of the vote in San strated in the visible “No on 8” campaign Francisco itself based on race, age, and spokespeople or leadership other than during
www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 49 specific targeted outreach rallies held once in strategy of the white-led Christian Right in the the large cities (Marriage Equality USA 2009, United States to convince communities of 5). In fact, official “No on 8” campaign colour that the lesbian/gay movement is white commercials did not feature any same-sex and wealthy, hence undeserving of civil rights couples or their families, regardless of racial (Carbado 2000; Hutchinson 2000). Further- background (6, 7). more, their key messaging was not one of This issue of visibility and represen- overt homophobia, but rather one of “saving tational practices of the “No on 8”’ campaign families,” a discourse that resonates in an era echo in the movie. There is a scene that of profound economic insecurity and uncer- captures Harvey Milk expressing his disgust tainty where heterosexual marriage stands as with the lack of gay visibility on early anti- the linchpin institution that binds “family” Proposition 6 materials. To a group of political together as the primary social safety mechan- elite he states, “People need to know who it is ism under conditions of neo-liberal privatiz- that’s being affected. You need at least one ation (Goldberg-Hiller 2004). old queer on this flyer” (Milk 2008). Indeed a Initial analyses that racialized the re- key message of Harvey Milk’s activism was sults of Proposition 8 thus occlude several rooted in gay liberation tenets of visibility that important factors that account for its failure. sought to generate public, positive conscious- The failure of the “No on 8” campaign to ness of lesbian and gay lives. This stands at achieve its desired outcome is much more some distance from the homonormative im- complex than this interpretive framework that pulses implicit in current forms of gay mar- engenders a descent into racism. Given that riage advocacy that insist on both visual and gay marriage rights in California were over- discursive representations of respectability turned at the same moment that Barack and sameness in order to secure legal rights Obama was elected President, comparisons within the domain of private domesticity. have been made, somewhat predictably, The limited outreach and resources between the civil rights struggles of lesbians proffered by the “No on 8” campaign to les- and gays on the one hand, and African bian/gay/queer communities stands in con- Americans on the other, succinctly captured trast to the “Protect Marriage/Yes on 8” cam- in the catchphrase “Gay is the New Black” paign. Spearheaded by the Mormon Church, (Gross 2008). With the subtitle, “The last this coalition included prominent Christian great civil rights struggle,” this turn of phrase Right organizations including Focus on the was the feature cover page for the December Family, Concerned Women for America, the 16, 2008, issue of The Advocate, a widely Family Research Council, as well as the distributed and long-standing LGBT publica- Roman Catholic Church, all of which raised tion in the U.S. Such wording is troublesome an estimated total of $40 million (Shin 2009, not only for the resonance it gives to the 4). The coalition pursued an extensive door- “post-racial” era Obama’s victory is said to to-door canvassing program, with more than herald, it also signals a queer political and 100,000 volunteers knocking on doors in rhetorical convergence with the conserva- every zip code in the state. It produced and tive/Christian Right that has long sought to distributed materials in 14 different languages posit “gay rights” and (racial) “civil rights” as (in contrast, the “No on 8” campaign offered antithetical. Encapsulating the structural ra- materials on their website in only four cism of the Proposition 8 moment (Spade and languages other than English), and campaign Willse 2009), the phrase only makes sense organizers purchased advertising space in when discourses of queerness and raciality Chinese, African American, Spanish, and Ko- are divided from each other as identity rean media weeks in advance of the election categories (“people of colour” versus “gays”) (Khan 2009; Kim 2008). In short, the “No on and as systems of power (racism versus 8” campaign was out-strategized by its social heterosexism). Queer/critical race scholars conservative opponents. The extensive ef- have long theorized and critiqued such a forts of these coalition partners to “Protect single-axis understanding of identity and Marriage” follows and continues a long-held power: it essentializes identities, privileges a
50 www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 forgetting of contemporary racial injustices, critical wariness when such representational recentres whiteness, denies homophobia practices depend upon a proximity to white- among white people, and relieves lesbian/ ness and articulations of homonationalism. gay/queer movements from accountability to Pairing the cinematic “othering” of anti-racist agendas (Carbado 2000; Grillo and Milk with the racial politics of Proposition 8 Wildman 1991; Hutchinson 2000). raises critical questions of who is the proper In an online open letter posted in the subject and what is the proper object of “gay days following the loss of Proposition 8, rights” agendas. Read in the same frame, the Adele Carpenter (2008) acutely observed that connection between this instance of politics other propositions on the state ballot dealing and culture has its routes and roots in the with affordable housing (Proposition B) and marginalization of people/communities of col- decriminalization of prostitution (Proposition our as central to queer politics. I would wish K) were defeated by voters in San Francisco. to end this paper in a hopeful tone and say She writes, “I saw no media reports released foregrounding the multivalence of queer pol- on November 5th scrutinizing the voting trends itics, queer bodies, and queer lives would de- of white LGBT San Franciscans on Propos- privilege the primacy bestowed on marriage itions B, N, K, 5, 6 or 9, as juxtaposed to the as desirable for everyone, by both main- numerous articles scrutinizing the voting hab- stream lesbian/gay politics and the Christian its of black and Latino voters on Prop 8.” Right, and might this not be or result in more Furthermore, she argues, despite the nega- exciting, and possibly anti-racist, queer polit- tive outcome of several of these propositions, ical agendas? However, given the perilous “outcry among the wider LGBT community times we live in and given the complicity of seems to have been reserved solely for the feminist and “gay rights” activisms with racist passage of Proposition 8.” Carpenter’s analy- state agendas, queer politics must neces- sis challenges the premise of normative les- sarily undertake a struggle against, and dis- bian and gay politics that prioritizes marriage identification with, hegemonic whiteness in as the central equality goal and, in so doing, gay/queer spaces themselves, including the resists a logic that would separate class, space of cultural representations. sexuality, and race from each other (see also Abrams 2010).7 Acknowledgements Many thanks to Sarah Lamble and Gada Conclusion Mahrouse, as well as to the anonymous There is, then, a particular racializa- reviewers and editors for their valuable tion of (queer) sexuality that knits Milk and comments and feedback on the paper. the political moment of Proposition 8 togeth- Various iterations of this paper were presen- er. Viewed and interpreted by audiences who ted at the following conferences and I am live and consume media in the larger socio- thankful for thoughtful feedback from partici- political field that racializes queerness, the pants: Critical Race & Anti-Colonial Studies movie itself also produces such a dynamic. (2009), Women’s & Gender Studies Re- While I do not want to overstretch the con- cherches Féministes (2010), and Canadian nections between the movie and activisms Initiative in Law, Culture & Humanities (2011). over same-sex marriage and “gay rights” more broadly, what is noteworthy are the con- Endnotes tinuities between the film’s racially normative 1. The city of San Francisco began issuing representations and the racial/racist marginal- marriage licenses to same-sex couples in izations evident in the “No on 8” campaign. February 2004.The California Supreme Court Both foster an anti-intersectional understand- held that the city lacked authority to issue ing of queer lives and bodies, thereby leading marriage licenses to same-sex couples and to the place where gay is made (and stays) thus invalidated the licenses already issued; white. Assumptions that gay marriage and/or however, it declined to rule on whether the cultural representations of (some) gay/queer exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage lives signal a progressive politics requires violates the state constitution (see Lockyer v.
www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 51 City and County of San Francisco 2004). 7. One should note that the June 2013 U.S. Numerous challenges, both opposing and in Supreme Court's rulings to reinstate same- favour of same-sex marriage rights, were filed sex marriage in California and to partially and the case made its way through the court repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) system with the resulting May 2008 California coincided with a devastating ruling that se- Supreme Court ruling (see In re Marriage verely curtails the Voting Rights Act (VRA), a Cases 2008). landmark civil rights piece of legislation that prohibits discrimination in voting. As some 2. Known as Perry v. Schwarzenegger, this observers have noted (McCarthy and Moore case was financially and legally backed by 2013), lesbian and gay people celebrated the American Foundation for Equal Rights, an both the Proposition 8 and DOMA rulings organization specifically established to launch without critiquing the racist outcome and this legal challenge. The lawyers were Ted racial discrimination resulting from amend- Olson and David Boies, who represented ments to the VRA that could disenfranchise George W. Bush and Al Gore, respectively, in many voters in states throughout the U.S. In Bush v. Gore (2000). Their case argued that other words, depending on which state they Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection live in, queer people of colour can get federal Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Fur- benefits when they marry but might not be thermore, because California’s already exist- able to vote. ing domestic partnership law does not pro- vide all of the legal and government benefits References and protection that marriage does, Propos- Abrams, K. “Elusive Coalitions: Reconsider- ition 8 singles out gay men and lesbians for a ing the Politics of Gender and Sexuality,” disfavoured legal status, thereby creating a UCLA Law Review. 57 (2010): 1135–1147. category of “second class citizens.” Ansen, D. “Gus Van Sant’s Film a Potent Mix- 3. For the challenge at the Ninth Circuit of ture of Sweetness and Chutzpah,” News- Appeals, see Perry v. Brown (2012); for the week. November 27, 2008. 52 www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 ialicious.com/2008/11/12/open-letter-resisting Gross, M.J. “Gay is the New Black?” The Ad- -the-racist-blame-game-post-prop-8/> vocate. November 16, 2008. “Do Yourself a Favor, WATCH the Movie,” In re Marriage Cases (2008), 43 Cal.4th 757 Join the Impact (website). Posted December (Supreme Court of California). 6, 2008. Goldberg-Hiller,J. The Limits to Union: Same- Lenon, S. “What’s So Civil about Marriage? Sex Marriage and the Politics of Civil Rights. The Racial Pedagogy of Same-Sex Marriage Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, in Canada,” Darkmatter. 3 (2008): 26–36. 2004. Lockyer v. City and County of San Francisco Grillo, T. and S. Wildman. “Obscuring the Im- (2004), 33 Cal.4th 1055 (Supreme Court of portance of Race: The Implication of Making California). Comparisons between Racism and Sexism (or Other -Isms),” Duke Law Journal. 2(1991): Manalansan IV, M.F. “In the Shadows of 397–412. Stonewall: Examining Gay Transnational Pol- www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013 53 itics and the Diasporic Dilemma,” Theorizing Perry v. Schwarzenegger (2010), C09-2292 Diaspora: A Reader, J.E. Braziel and A. (United States District Court, N.D. California). Mannur, eds. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, 2003, pp. 207–227. Puar, J.K. Terrorist Assemblages: Homo- nationalism in Queer Times. Durham & Lon- ———. “Queer Love in the Time of War and don: Duke University Press, 2007. Shopping,” A Companion to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Studies, Retzloff, T. “Eliding Trans Latino/a Queer Ex- G.E. Haggerty and M. McGarry, eds. Mal- perience in U.S. LGBT History: José Sarria don, MA: Blackwell, 2007, pp. 77–86. and Sylvia Rivera Reexamined,” Centro Jour- nal. 29.001 (2007): 140–161. Marriage Equality USA. “We Will Never Go Back: Grassroots Input on California’s No on Ross, M.B. “Beyond the Closet as Raceless 8 Proposition 8 Campaign. 2009.” McAllister, M. Epic Encounters: Culture, Shilts, R. The Mayor of Castro Street: The Media, and U.S. Interests in the Middle East, Life and Times of Harvey Milk. New York: St. 1945–2000. Berkeley, CA: U of California Martin’s Press, 1982. Press, 2001. Shin, M. Show Me the Money! The Geo- McCarthy, T.P. and D.L. Moore. "In Conver- graphy of Contributions to California’s Prop- sation: On the Landmark SCOTUS Decisions, osition 8. Los Angeles: California Center for Single-Variable Politics and Movement For- Population Research, 2009. ward," The Feminist Wire. June 26, 2013. Patton, C. “‘On Me, Not In Me’: Locating Thobani, S. Exalted Subjects: Studies in the Affect in Nationalism after AIDS,” Theory, Making of Race and Nation in Canada. To- Culture & Society. 15.3-4 (1998): 355–373. ronto: University of Toronto Press, 2007. Perez, H. “You Can Have My Brown Body The Times of Harvey Milk, directed by R. Ep- and Eat It, Too!,” Social Text. 84–85, 23.3-4 stein. 1984, Telling Pictures (San Francisco). (2005): 171–191. Travers, P. “Milk,” Rolling Stone. November Perry v.Brown (2012), 10-16696 (United 27, 2008. 54 www.msvu.ca/atlantis ■□ 36.1, 2013