Originally posted by djjoshuaallen
LOL I know who you are now. I think we met through aaron michael one day. Anyway, i see you at circus nearly every time im there...you always there bright and early!
haha yeah he is always there early. I gotta make it out there one of these days. Even if I am bored of trance.
selfEvolution
quote:
Originally posted by djjoshuaallen
LOL I know who you are now. I think we met through aaron michael one day. Anyway, i see you at circus nearly every time im there...you always there bright and early!
Yep, yep, except when I'm at LoveFest, Sports Arena, Vanguard, Nocturnal, etc. This December I'm in Arizona, Texas and Louisiana most of the month.
selfEvolution
quote:
Originally posted by gehzumteufel
Actually I saw your pic on FB and am totally clear on who ya are. :)
Thanks, now I am totally clear on who you are too. :) I visited aukes.com - totally beautiful people.
R!CH
thought i'd double post this from the mormon thread...
i haven't followed this issue since election day and still haven't read the last few pages on this thread, but i thought i'd point out that old age, religion, low education and low cultural integration are prominent symptoms of yes on 8 voters. supporters have less formal education, are recent immigrants, religious and/or elderly... all types easily manipulated by fear and lies. there is no correlation with wealth/income.
quote:
Some areas of S.F. voted to ban same-sex marriage
Heather Knight, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, November 14, 2008
For all the talk of San Francisco values, a Chronicle analysis of how the city voted on the state's same-sex marriage ban shows a city geographically divided on the issue - and voting trends that turn San Francisco's typical political spectrum on its head.
One in 4 San Franciscans voted in favor of Proposition 8, far fewer than the 52 percent who voted to ban same-sex marriage statewide. But a closer look shows race, age and education influenced voters more than anything else - even among those living in one of the world's most gay-friendly cities.
Voters in 54 of San Francisco's 580 precincts supported the ban, with a high of 65 percent of voters favoring it in parts of Chinatown and downtown. More than half of voters in large swaths of Bayview-Hunters Point, Visitacion Valley, the Excelsior and areas around Lake Merced also voted to ban same-sex marriage.
Neighborhoods including the Marina, Laurel Heights and Mission Bay - which almost always vote more conservatively than neighborhoods such as Bayview and Chinatown - voted overwhelmingly against Prop. 8.
"With the racial and religious overprint that we're seeing, the standard San Francisco politics get thrown out the window on this one," said political consultant David Latterman, who further crunched the precinct-by-precinct voting results that The Chronicle obtained this week from the Department of Elections.
"This issue is very separate from what we usually think of as liberal and conservative," he said.
The trends
Latterman said the issue played out in San Francisco the same way it plays out everywhere else: Race, age and education were big influences in one's vote on Prop. 8. Latterman did not factor in religion, but exit polls throughout California showed a strong church affiliation correlated with a vote in favor of the ban among all racial groups.
In San Francisco, the more white people living in a precinct, the more likely it was to vote against the proposition. The opposite was true for precincts with many Asian or African American residents.
Voters ages 18 to 29 were overwhelmingly against the measure, while those older 60 were overwhelmingly for it. And those with only a high school education mostly voted for the measure, while those who graduated from college were largely against it.
Income did not correlate with San Franciscans' votes on Prop. 8, Latterman said. For example, 65 percent of voters living in the few blocks around Bloomingdale's downtown - including posh condos inside the Four Seasons and St. Regis Hotel - voted to ban same-sex marriage.
But only 35 percent of those living in the stately mansions of St. Francis Wood and 24 percent of those in Sea Cliff voted for the ban. Latterman guessed that businesspeople moving downtown are newly arrived from other places, whereas the others have been "part of the city's fabric for a long time."
Speaking of St. Francis Wood, the neighborhood was the most conservative of any in the city, according to Latterman's Progressive Voting Index, which looks at how the city's precincts have voted on a variety of controversial ballot measures. That includes a measure that called for impeaching President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney and an initiative to ban firearms.
Where a precinct fell on Latterman's index had very little correlation with how it voted on Prop. 8.
Only 35 percent of St. Francis Wood voters favored the same-sex marriage ban, which is not too far off from the precinct around BART's 24th Street Station. That Mission District precinct is considered the city's most liberal, and 1 in 5 voters there supported the ban.
Campaign smarts
Chinatown also voted differently than its usual politics might suggest, said David Lee, executive director of the Chinese American Voter Education Committee, which has done its own analysis of the results. The neighborhood voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama for president and left-leaning David Chiu for supervisor, but also voted most heavily for Prop. 8.
Lee said immigrants who've been in the city for less than 10 years tended to vote for the ban, while those who've been here longer tended to vote against it. He said the Yes on 8 campaign took out full-page ads in Chinese-language newspapers, which influenced a lot of voters.
"It shaped the opinion of this population that wasn't being communicated to by the No on 8 campaign until very late," he said.
In Visitacion Valley, where more than half of voters supported Prop. 8, many residents told The Chronicle they voted that way for one of two reasons: their religious beliefs or fear that children would learn about gay marriage in school, which was played up in Yes on 8 television commercials. Some in the neighborhood wrongly believed it was written into the measure.
"I don't have anything against gays, but I don't think it's right teaching kids about it in school," said Terrance Powell, 32, who was cutting hair in a barbershop on Leland Avenue. "I have a son, and I'd rather teach him that at home."
Joe Tan, a 40-year-old taxi driver who was picking up his son from the nearby Busy Bee Child Care Center, said his priest told the congregation repeatedly that marriage was between one man and one woman.
"I'm Catholic, and I follow my religion," he said.
Not surprisingly, the precincts with the least amount of support for Prop. 8 - 3 percent yes - were concentrated around the Castro. Steve Gibson, 42 and the director of a gay men's health center, was sipping coffee outside Spike's Coffees and Teas and said he was surprised that a quarter of his fellow San Franciscans voted to take away his right to marry.
"I live in a bubble," he said, shaking his head. He campaigned with the No on 8 side in Albany on election day, but hadn't considered going to neighborhoods in the city. "I wasn't focused on San Francisco."
All of this demographic information can be useful in strengthening outreach for the next time around, but shouldn't be used to blame anybody for Prop. 8's passage, said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
"Our natural impulse when something happens that really hurts us and wounds us deeply is to lash out," she said. "However, there's no one group that can be blamed for that, and there's nothing productive in attempting to assign blame. ... A conversation that blames is a conversation that looks backward and does nothing to build bridges."
this was never a surprise to me, but if you weren't aware of your alignment on the issue, here it is. if you have a problem with same sex marriage, then you think like an elderly, religious, low-education recent immigrant.
DJ Reese
quote:
Originally posted by gehzumteufel
haha yeah he is always there early. I gotta make it out there one of these days. Even if I am bored of trance.
Well...I'd like to meet you all too (not talking to Josh cause I already know him...but would love to kick it with him for a good night at Circus) Nov 22nd at Nikita!
I'm playing one of my last LA gigs...probably for a while that night.
selfEvolution
quote:
Originally posted by bas
Yeah! Why should gay people be left out of that statistic? Totally unfair imo
Finding anything approaching a perfect "happy marriage" is a fantasy because there is no such thing as "Mr. or Mrs. Right" - we're fortunate to find 50% because few people can meet even half our desires, expectations or dreams. Even the best marriages often take a lot of work, patience, understanding, cooperation - in other words, it takes the best within us - and that's all NONheterosexuals want..."is that EQUAL fighting chance - even if the odds are stacked against them, even if it's only in NAME"..... to raise a family and not have to explain to their previously unwanted adoptive or foster children why they are called "domestic partners" while Bill and Barbie next store are called "married".
Voting "NO" on Prop 8 was a plea for the best within us. A plea for mercy, tolerance, equality and understanding, even if all of these qualities were only represented by one word - "Marriage". This was also a great chance for heterosexuals and "Christians" to stand up for one of the last minorities who are openly vilified and hated at worse, or who are all-too-often stereotyped in the worse ways based on the worse behavior of a few in their group, even in this day when people should know better. For evidence, see DjJosh's post where he singles out gay violence while ignoring the hundreds of thousands of NONheterosexuals who have died at the hands of "believers" in the past century alone. Who and what do so-called "civilized nations" owe that to?
By the FBI's own statistics, for every gay-on-straight "hate crime" DJJosh can cite, any student of logic or sociology can easily find thousands of "straight-on-gay" hate crimes, and the FBI estimates many are under reported. This should come as no surprise, as many "gays" and bisexuals are still too afraid to come out of the closet, especially to the police. It is no secret that *some* police officers have been far-less-than-friendly to the NONheterosexual community. A relatively small minority that the police are sworn under oath to their god & government to "serve and protect".
It is often said that a nation is only as great as it treats the most powerless among them. This holds true for individuals as well. Qualities such as tolerance and respect is mightiest in the mighty, for it is the mighty majority who have the power to give the most. Instead, last November 4th, they took it away in favor of their prejudices and unfounded fears about their own "marriages". If their "marriage" was really threaten by two consenting adults of the same gender getting married, then many of them didn't have much of a marriage to begin with. Divorce rates confirm this. Divorce is their greatest threat, not Ellen & Elizabeth getting married.
On a local TV show, "Hollywood Today" I interviewed Mitch Grobeson, an openly gay LAPD officer, and he was routinely mocked and harassed by his fellow officers. Two wrongs have never made a right - and just as violence among a few "gay" people does not represent all NONheterosexuals by the a long-shot, neither does violence against "gays" by "straights" represent most heterosexuals. It's very telling when *some* people single out evil in the context of an entire group. It exposes a very thinly-veiled agenda based on their own deep-rooted prejudice.
naeblis
quote:
Originally posted by R!CH
thought i'd double post this from the mormon thread...
i haven't followed this issue since election day and still haven't read the last few pages on this thread, but i thought i'd point out that old age, religion, low education and low cultural integration are prominent symptoms of yes on 8 voters. supporters have less formal education, are recent immigrants, religious and/or elderly... all types easily manipulated by fear and lies. there is no correlation with wealth/income.
Dude, I am sorry R!CH, but you're ideas are ridiculous. If you are going to make offensive comments to fit your own prejudices than please back them up with some sort of measurable statistics. Those in the news paper article, really don't help much, because most voters in CA have more than a high school education. Put some numbers to the statistics, and it will paint a different picture.
SelfEvolution: I have really appreciated most of your comments on this topic. I haven't visited this thread without you being the most recent poster. Hah! Thanks though for your thoughts btw. Despite that I disagree with you about many things, I couldn't agree more with you on your last comment about taking a single instance and extrapolating it to the entire population (be it "Yes-ers" or "No-ers"). Like I said before, I really think there are a million beautiful shades of gray on this topic.
in2muzikk
quote:
Originally posted by naeblis
Dude, I am sorry R!CH, but you're ideas are ridiculous. If you are going to make offensive comments to fit your own prejudices than please back them up with some sort of measurable statistics. Those in the news paper article, really don't help much, because most voters in CA have more than a high school education. Put some numbers to the statistics, and it will paint a different picture.
California Proposition 8: Ban on Gay Marriage
California Proposition 8:
Ban on Gay Marriage
2,240 Respondents
Are you a college graduate?
Total Yes No
Yes (50%) 47% 53%
No (50%) 58% 42%
Thanks In2Muzikk. Perhaps the above can be more clearly detailed as follows:
California Proposition 8:
Ban on Gay Marriage
2,240 Respondents
Non College Graduates who voted to NOT ban "Gay" Marriage: 42%
College Graduates who voted to NOT ban "Gay" Marriage: 53%
Difference: 11%
In statistics courses, we would call the above a "significant correlation", with self-reported NONcollege graduates voting 11% more to Ban NONheterosexual marriage than those who have graduated from college. There is usually a margin of error of plus or minus 3% to 6% as people can misreport their education, but that would work both ways and the percentage differences are still "significant" even with the highest margin of error.
In other words, although it is not a 100% objective, quantitative poll, no poll can be - they are qualitative in nature. Nevertheless, the above study is very telling as a qualitative poll based on qualitative methods used in peer-review journals in the fields of Sociology & Political Science. Such qualitative polls are usually very accurate, as were almost every poll about Obama and other Democrats leads over Republicans, for the White House, Senate and Congress. Almost every major poll, except for Fox "news", were generally correct in that the Democrat's had significant leads in all three areas, based on polling conducted more than a month before the November 4t election.
Of course there were some "confounding variable" such as Sarah Palin, who managed to confound over half the population and even many Republican leaders.
In terms of the Propostion 8 votes;
In three other words: It's kinda obvious.
Many studies have been conducted in both Psychology and Sociology that indicate that NONcolledge graduates are more likely to score high on scales measuring prejudice towards sexual minorities. In other words, in anonymous questionnaires, where large groups of individuals can check answers A,B, C or D that measure negative opinions and attitudes towards NONheterosexuals, NONcollege students are more likely to test high high in negative attribution, stereotypes, superstitions, etc. Even if we swallowed the superstition that marriage is just about words or semantics, clearly for many it's also about hatred, prejudice and just plain old willful ignorance, even if that willfulness is subconscious.
In other words: It's been kinda obvious for too long, and here was a chance for a portion of our society to evolve and grow out of their primitive fears and prejudices. To purge themselves of ancient predispositions born of archaic misinformation.
A slight majority of California voters failed themselves in that regard. Many of their votes are now deemed by millions the world over as wantingly cruel, and in terms of the Golden Rule, all the more sinful, in that alleged "Christians" above all, should know how to practice the Golden Rule. Instead, many of them did just the opposite even if it meant more sins of lies, distortions and "baring false witness".
Proposition 8 will go down as some of the ugliest pages in the books of Religious History and Human Intolerance. I feel sorry for those who blindly helped to write the chapters. Your names will be attached to them forever. Prejudice, be not proud, because the likelihood that some of our current and future friends and family will be NONheterosexual is probably 100%.
in2muzikk
Yeah, that's it. I was gonna let the reader figure it out for themselves, but...
quote:
Originally posted by selfEvolution
In three other words: It's kinda obvious.
:eyespop:
R!CH
here's some more interesting info on the YES voter from that cnn link...
they make up
75% of the 6% of voters who are black women
70% of the 10% of voters who are black
61% of the 15% of voters who are 65 years or older
58% of the 17% of voters who never attended college
82% of the 29% who are republicans
85% of the 30% who are conservatives
84% of the 32% who attend church weekly
81% of the 17% who are evangelical/born-again christians
65% of the 24% who are very worried about another terrorist attack in the usa
80% of the 38% who voted for bush in 2004
85% of the 30% who approve of the war in iraq
71% of the 9% who feel the race of the candidate is an important factor
86% of the 21% who approve of how george w bush is handling his job
84% of the 38% who voted for mccain
naeblis i'm sorry if these statistical correlations offend your ego. you should learn to embrace your epistemic community or reconcile whatever it is that makes you uncomfortable with these associations.
djjoshuaallen
This thread continues, wow. I say lets change it up a bit.
