When Xenophobia Meets Homophobia

by Guest Contributor Marisol LeBrón, originally published at NACLA and Post Pomo Nuyorican Homo

An ugly blame game ensued after the passing of California’s Proposition 8, which restricted the definition of marriage to a union between a man and a woman. With exit polls reporting 70 percent of Blacks and 53 percent of Latinos/as supporting the ban on gay marriage, many white members of the LGBT community blamed people of color for the ban’s success.

The December issue of gay news magazine The Advocate stepped into the fray. The cover of the issue provocatively announced, “Gay is the New Black.” Although the cover story’s author, Michael Joseph Gross, dismissed blaming Black voters as a “false conclusion” and a “terrible mistake,” comments posted to the site took him to task for other reasons. Most comments strongly disagreed with Gross’ Black/gay comparison, but many others asked why communities of color and queer communities are still considered mutually exclusive in the mainstream LGBT rights movement.

A comment posted by “Greg J,” pointedly charged, “Gays of color, transgender, and yes, even lesbians are missing from the larger discourse of the gay rights struggle – primarily the gay marriage issue. The gay right’s movement was and remains the ‘gay, white, middle class’ movement!”

The Prop 8 fallout shows how much work remains to be done to connect the LGBT rights movement with other struggles for social justice across a spectrum of issues. Unfortunately, it may have taken the brutal murder of Ecuadoran immigrant Jose Oswaldo Sucuzhañay to highlight the invisibility of queer people of color – particularly queer immigrants – in LGBT rights discourse. His murder will hopefully provide an impetus for coalition building.

Jose Sucuzhañay and his brother Romel were attending a Sunday evening church party on December 7, 2008. They later decided to end the night with some drinks at a local bar in the Bushwick section of Brooklyn. The two brothers left the bar at 3:30 a.m. and walked home arm-in-arm to support each other. Three men drove up to the Sucuzhañay brothers, one man got out of the car and began to shout anti-gay and anti-Latino slurs at them.

The man then attacked Jose Sucuzhañay and broke a bottled over the back of his head causing him to fall to the ground. His brother Romel ran to call the police. Romel saw the attackers kick his brother’s prone body and beat him with an aluminum baseball bat. The beating stopped when Romel returned and told the attackers that he had called the police. Jose was rushed to Elmhurst Hospital and remained in critical condition until he passed away five days later. He was 31 and left behind two children.

Sucuzhañay’s killing comes a month after a group of Long Island teens fatally stabbed Ecuadoran immigrant Marcelo Lucero; it also follows the murder of Luis Ramirez, who was beaten to death last July in Shenandoah, Pennsylvania.

The increased violence and surveillance against immigrant communities has coincided with violence against queers of color, including the murder of Duanna Johnson, a Black transgender woman. Johnson was beaten by two Memphis police officers last February. Nine months later, she was found shot to death in North Memphis.

Blogger Angry Brown Butch reflected on Johnson’s murder: “Just to be trans, just to be a woman, just to be a person of color in this country is enough to drastically increase one’s exposure to hatred and violence; when oppressions overlap, violence tends to multiply.”

Although Sucuzhañay was not gay, his murder represents the danger and uncertainty facing queers, people of color, immigrants, and other marginalized communities. For the most part, however, both mainstream LGBT rights groups and immigrant rights groups have failed to recognize the potential for collaboration and coalition, even in the wake of Sucuzhañay’s murder.

Immediately after the attack, media outlets discussed the homophobic and xenophobic nature of the attack against the Sucuzhañay brothers. But as time went on, reports began to only highlight either the anti-gay or the anti-Latino/a nature of the attack rather than seeing the two as joint-causes.

“I have seen some members of the Latino community express indignation at some outside the Latino community using the attack for political gain,” notes Andrés Duque of the Latino/a LGBT site Blabbeando. “I have also seen a Queens-based Ecuadorian community organization put out a call for a vigil highlighting the xenophobic nature of the crime while not mentioning that it might have also been a homophobic crime.”

Indeed, rather than illuminating the vulnerability that both Latino/a and LGBT communities face and interrogating the systemic inequalities that enable that marginalization, some are more concerned with shaping how the incident is described and remembered in the media. One example of this is Diego Sucuzhañay’s denial that the attack on his brothers was homophobic in nature. Although Romel told the police that anti-gay and anti-Latino slurs were shouted at them as they were assaulted, Diego denies that homophobia was an aspect of his brothers’ attack.

Diego told New York’s El Diario/La Prensa that, “My brother Romel told me that they shouted insults against Latinos, that they shouted ‘Hispanic sons of bitches,’ but not anti-gay insults.” But Romel has not publicly retracted his statement regarding anti-gay slurs. And other family members have spoken about the murder in terms of homophobia also being a motivating factor. So some observers following the case wonder whether Diego’s statements to the press are an attempt to disassociate his brother’s murder from any implications of queerness.

Still, many others are people speaking out against Sucuzhañay’s murder by clearly connecting issues of racism, homophobia, and xenophobia. At his brother’s funeral in Cuenca, Ecuador, German Sucuzhañay told the Associated Press, “The brutal killing of my brother Oswaldo is the result of xenophobia, of homophobia and racism that our compatriots are experiencing in these times.”

Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa condemned the xenophobia and homophobia behind Sucuzhañay’s tragic death. Correa told the press that Sucuzhañay was “vilely murdered because of xenophobia and homophobia. They confused him for a homosexual…” The President called on the public to fight against “xenophobia, homophobia and all types of phobia, all types of discrimination, all types of violence.”

While a number of U.S.-based organizations including Bienestar, The Audre Lorde Project, People of Color in Crisis (POCC), and Incite! have all been working to address the intersections between multiple forms of oppression, both the mainstream LGBT and Latino/a rights movements remain remarkably single issue oriented.

The killing of Jose Sucuzhañay, however, challenges Latino/a and LGBT leaders to build a broad-based vision for social justice that acknowledges the linkages between various communities and struggles. Hopefully, both immigrant rights group and LGBT rights groups will begin to see the parallels between a number of these ballot initiatives sponsored by right-wing groups – whether they are anti-immigrant, anti-choice, or anti-gay.

The fight in 1994 to repeal California’s Proposition 187, which sought to prevent undocumented immigrants from accessing state benefits, can perhaps serve as inspiration for those working to overturn Prop 8 and provide an in-road for collaboration between these intersecting struggles. Though not identical, these grassroots struggles provide a crucial space for collaboration between marginalized communities.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. The Intersection » Some recent news on 09 Feb 2009 at 7:42 pm

    [...] recent Racialicious Blog post: When Xenophobia Meets Homophobia, guest contributor Marisol LeBron, originally published at Nacla and Post Pomo Nuyorican Homo: [...]

Comments

  1. Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! wrote:

    Poor guy– that’s horrible a queer man of color was murdered. I didn’t even hear about this on the news.

    I, too, was shocked when a lot of white gays and lesbians blamed Blacks and Latinos for the passing of Prop H8… come on, they should have known better than that.

    sadly, not one group is ever excluded from being racist (or bigoted) to another group.

  2. Monie wrote:

    Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! summed it up perfectly.

  3. queerhapa wrote:

    UDMPG, Sucuzhañay was not gay. He was only perceived to be so because he was walking arm in arm with his brother.

  4. Minx wrote:

    I hope the passage of prop 8 forces ppl of color to recognize the DANGERS of thier homophobia and how if affects communities. Violence starst small and then…..

  5. Alyssa wrote:

    I think comments like UDMPG’s are the reason that the family does not want to let his death get linked with homophobia. Even though he was percieved to be gay (by his killers), he was straight (with a family). The idea of calling him gay is one more insult to the family. (No I don’t think gay is an insult, but I would be offended if someone said my husband is gay beccause that would mean he doesn’t love me). They already have to deal with his death- they should not have to be defending his marriage as well.
    @ comment #4: PoCs are not the only ones that have problems with homophobia. If you are talking about the community as a whole, it can just as easily be said that the homosexual community needs to recognize the dangers of their racism. How about this: people as a whole (no matter their race, gender, or sexual orientation) need to recognize that any type of discrimination affects all people including themselves.

  6. Maus wrote:

    “I, too, was shocked when a lot of white gays and lesbians blamed Blacks and Latinos for the passing of Prop H8… come on, they should have known better than that. ”

    The media loves stirring up minority groups against each other, and partisan cable news channels, so much more so.

    You can blame the people for getting that impression, but I can also understand why that impression would be received, considering that our media has failed us time and again when it comes to putting forth an actually balanced perspective, rather than a false balance to push the narrative of the day.

  7. Anonymous wrote:

    @Alyssa:
    “The idea of calling him gay is one more insult to the family. (No I don’t think gay is an insult, but I would be offended if someone said my husband is gay beccause that would mean he doesn’t love me).”

    I have to admit – I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. If being called gay is NOT an insult, what is there to take offense at? And even if your husband were gay, that would not mean that he doesn’t love you. I’m just not understanding what you’re getting at. To me, it sounds like you DO think gay is an insult, when you say you’d take offense.

    When you say “The idea of calling him gay is one more insult to the family”, that’s just the problem we’re talking about. As long as being gay is perceived to be a negative thing, as long as it’s an insult to call someone gay, we’ll keep having these kinds of tragic and senseless incidents.

    Our culture is so messed up regarding sexuality and masculinity that two brothers (or friends) can’t walk arm in arm in this country without fear of violence or harassment.

  8. Alyssa wrote:

    @anon (#7):
    I agree two brothers (or two gay men) should be able to walk hand in hand unharassed.
    Yes I agree that this is a hate crime against gay people (although the victim himself was not actually gay). And I think this is important to note.
    However, it bothers me that people are saying that he is a gay man when he is not. (I think this the reason the family is trying to make this homophobic label go away).
    But yes I think it is wrong to call people what they are not. Like I said I would be offended if I were in their position. Let me try to explain further (as it is a complex issue and I’m having trouble explaining without going on for pages).
    If I were the wife, I wouldn’t want to have to repeatedly explain to people that my deceased husband was straight. I woudn’t want to explain that we had a marriage based on love and I am not just a beard for my husband.
    For the record, I also think it would be wrong if he were a gay man and people kept saying he was straight. I can’t imagine how hard it must be to lose a significat other and at the same time have to defend that I am indeed the person who the deceased really loved (and not just a cover).

  9. Kendra wrote:

    Perhaps the family is homophobic or they’d rather not have Sucuzhañay’s death used toward a queer agenda or a movement where they don’t see their needs and worries reflected.

    Perhaps they are more insistent on shadowing the anti-gay slander because they don’t want his death equated with an attack on a gay man simply because the victim was not gay. They might simply lean more toward issues facing immigrants than those facing queer folk without being homophobic themselves, but if they were homophobic or resistent to lgbtiq involvement, it could be due to the mainstream image (white, male and rich). That particular image may speak of privilege where they are not as fortunate to be on the receiving end of such benefits.

  10. Squidfly wrote:

    Minx wrote:

    I hope the passage of prop 8 forces ppl of color to recognize the DANGERS of thier homophobia and how if affects communities. Violence starst small and then…..

    What!!

  11. Daomadan wrote:

    “They already have to deal with his death- they should not have to be defending his marriage as well.”

    Yep, those poor straight folks having to defend their marriages and all that. /sarcasm

    This unfortunate death is just one more example of how the patriarchy hurts men as well. Because Sucuzhañay was targeted for appearing gay (and was also a POC) he was murdered. The point isn’t whether he was gay or not, he wasn’t, but the perception! The simple perception of two men, brothers, walking arm in arm after a fun night out was taken to be more and they were targeted. The more we break down these “perceptions” the better so we can stop horrible events like this happening, so people won’t feel the need to target others for being a person or color or queer or whatever.

  12. LaurynX wrote:

    @ #5
    “PoCs are not the only ones that have problems with homophobia. If you are talking about the community as a whole, it can just as easily be said that the homosexual community needs to recognize the dangers of their racism.”

    Didn’t this article speak to erasure? This statement implies that the homosexual community and poc community do not overlap.

    sigh.

  13. Alyssa wrote:

    @ #12 Actually that was exactly my point. There is a lot of overlap between the communities,which is why I felt the need to say something about this: “hope the passage of prop 8 forces ppl of color to recognize the DANGERS of thier homophobia and how if affects communities.”

    @ #11: You are right. “They are defending their marriage” is a bad choice of words on my part. But I still feel that we shouldn’t be attacking this family. They are coping with the sudden death of a loved one. And it is understandable (at least to me) that they don’t want to deal with telling people that no his marriage is not a sham- he really did love his wife. Maybe there is homophobic tendencies in the Sucuzhañay family, I don’t know. But at the moment, I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

  14. pololly wrote:

    @Daomadan

    “Because Sucuzhañay was targeted for appearing gay (and was also a POC) he was murdered”

    Was he? Maybe he was targeted for being a POC (and also appearing gay), or maybe for appearing gay and being a POC. In other words, we can hardly fault the parents for creating their own implied hierarchy (and dismissing the homophobia issue) when you just did exactly the same thing.

    By the way, those parents may be on the receiving end of homophobia within their community, or may, like Kendra said, feel that their son’s death is being co opted by a movement that they do not feel connected to. They may have been continuously harassed themselves for being POC and may want this phenomenon highlighted.

    Whatever the reason it, assuming that this is just about defending ’straight marriage’ or whatever is not really helpful. Those parents need people to reach out to them, not assume the worst about them.

  15. Daomadan wrote:

    “In other words, we can hardly fault the parents for creating their own implied hierarchy (and dismissing the homophobia issue) when you just did exactly the same thing.”

    I wasn’t talking about his parents (?), I was talking about the patriachy as a whole that creates these attitudes and how they hurt all people.

    “Was he? Maybe he was targeted for being a POC (and also appearing gay), or maybe for appearing gay and being a POC. In other words, we can hardly fault the parents for creating their own implied hierarchy (and dismissing the homophobia issue) when you just did exactly the same thing.”

    What was I dismissing? These are all intersected. In this case you can’t separate the homophobia from the racism and vice versa.

    I made no implication that this was all about “defending straight marriage.” Someone made a comment on this thread about the wife perhaps having to defend her marriage…straight privilege much?

  16. timarasa wrote:

    @ Daomadan: yes, i was thinking the same thing, how “patriarchy hurts men”, men like the sucuzhanays as well as men with perceptions like those of the attackers. i say this b/c this tragedy clearly highlights how men and boys as a whole today are held emotional captive to the dogma of ‘what it means to be a man’. it’s so sad to imagine the depth of emotional deprivation and lack of real social connectedness the attackers must have amongst themselves as ‘friends’ to feel so ‘threatened’ (to the point of murder) when confronted by two men who simply have their arms linked. it makes me think of an article i read a couple of months back (heck, might have been from an excerpt on this website, can’t remember) about this suppression of open emotional expression in male relationships. the one anecdote from it that is forever seared into my mind was a case of a brutal gang rape committed by a group of boys/young men who were all friends. when questioned individually by psychiatrists, it became clear that for some of the guys it was a sick way of bonding with their group–with one even describing that most exciting and heightening part of the experience for him was feeling the semen of his other friends inside the poor girl they were raping. the girl wasn’t the focus, but to them just the vehicle in their twisted ritual of intimate male bonding without fear of appearing ‘gay’ or not ‘real men’ at least amongst themselves.
    sickening.
    yeah, outward perceptions need to be torn down, but there must to be some serious emotional re-education or more appropriately reconnection in male relationships as a whole. if more men and boys feel it’s okay (& healthy!) for themselves to express genuine love for other male friends privately and publicly, the more likely they’ll tolerate it (or think nothing of it) when seeing two other guys walking arm in arm on the street.

  17. Alyssa wrote:

    @ #15: In case my apology wasn’t clear the first time, I did not intend my defending marriage statement to come out the way it did. I didn’t recognize my straight privilege at the moment that I wrote that. Once it was pointed out, I was embarassed and ashamed, and once again I’m sorry about that statement.
    That being said, I understand why the Sucuzhañay family (the brother in particular) would want to take back his statements. And I don’t think this necessiarly makes them homophobic. I won’t make the arguement again, but just ask you to read Kendra’s atatement (comment #9).
    To the mod: I’m sorry to make so many comments in this thread. I just thought if I’m still being called out on my comment, maybe I should make another, more clear apology.