Proposition 8

Proposition 8, Sentimentality, and the Discourses of Religion, Family and Race in the Gettoknowusfirst.org Media Campaign

California’s Proposition 8:

Proposition 8 was a citizens’ ballot initiative that sought to amend the California Constitution and add a provision that that says: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," effectively overruling the California Supreme Court’s decision of In re Marriage Cases. In the Supreme Court’s judicial decision the justices ruled that "California legislative and initiative measures limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violate the state constitutional rights of same-sex couples and may not be used to preclude same-sex couples from marrying." Prop 8, through a majority vote of California citizens, overturned the Supreme Courts decision.

The battle over gay marriage in California was highly contentious, extremely controversial and at times, spurred physical violence and civil unrest. Supporters of Prop 8 argued that “protecting marriage protects children,” “Same-sex marriage will be taught in schools,” and that homosexuals shouldn’t have the right to “redefine the sanctity of marriage for everyone else.” Opponents of the measure sought to frame the debate as a civil rights issue, arguing that laws "should guarantee the same freedom and rights to everyone" and Prop 8 “denies gays and lesbians the respect, dignity and responsibility that come with marriage.” The significance and influence of media texts and popular culture on the fight over Prop 8 is remarkable. In total, the campaigns both for and against Proposition 8 raised more than 82 million dollars, coming only second to the 2008 presidential campaigns in total expenditure. Much of the campaign costs were used to cover the cost of promotional materials, advertising, public relations, and integrated marketing efforts. In short, media channels, particularly television and internet viral marketing campaigns became the site to contest the “shared meanings” of marriage and to renegotiate or protect the symbolism that marriage connotes in our society in areas sociological, spiritual, economical and cultural.

Perhaps due to the November 8 general presidential election, the Prop 8 debate was characterized by high levels of political and legal overtones with both sides using threats and fear arousal to persuade audiences to adopt certain positions. The discourses during were highly charged:

This video demonstrates the tactics used during the Prop 8 debate. This video was used to

argue against Prop 8--notice the tone and the logic used in these two videos.

This video was to support the Prop 8 measure. Notice the use of actual text and wording as argument.

Proposition 8 ultimately passed by a majority vote of 52%

The Gettoknowusfirst campaign:

In response to the passage of Proposition 8 and the perceived failure of the gay rights movement, Powerup, a non-profit women’s film production and education organization, collaborated with gay and lesbian families to create a media campaign called “Gettoknowusfirst” with the self-proclaimed goal of “capt[uring] the hearts and minds of people who do not understand why marriage is so important to us.” In January 2009, the organization hit the airwaves with five 30-second Public Service Announcements (PSA) that have aired on television stations throughout the state of California and feature five strategically selected and diverse gay and lesbian couples engaging in everyday domestic activities. The PSAs aired in 42 of the 58 California counties where Prop 8 received 50% or more of the vote.

Sentimentality, Pathos and the Unmarked Body:

This new campaign strategy, no doubt borne from a 20/20 bird’s eye view of the successes and failures of the prior campaigns, is a departure from the blatant legal and political overtones associated with the initial fight over Prop 8 and gay marriage; Instead persuasive appeals of Ethos (“speaker credibility”) and Logos (“reason” and “the argument itself”) are relegated to faint undertones and the appeal of Pathos is elevated. Persuasion from pathos involves engaging the readers’ or listeners’ emotions and establishing “state of reception” for one’s ideas. This is usually accomplished through appealing to people’s sense of identity, self-interest, and their emotions. This process also commonly evokes a sense of “pity for somebody or contempt for some wrong.” In other words, it is a fabrication of emotions; a construction of the circumstances (“emotive triggers”) that create a situation in which one’s ideas can be accepted.

While the idea of pathos is a basis for my research, I use the term ‘sentimentality’ to refer to this process. I argue that there is a dichotomy between homosexuality and marriage that cannot be subjected to reason or credibility. In fact, homosexuality is viewed as a perversion, choice of identity, and abomination, while marriage is associated with concepts of love, morality and societal advancement. I also contend that the moniker “gettoknowusfirst” is less about its name sake and more about positioning the gay marriage and gay civil rights movement into with more of a mainstream appeal. It is not get to know us first; it is get to know us as one of you. In the texts of the gettoknowusfirst campaign there are obvious attempts to “humanize” homosexual couples-to reposition the discourses of gay marriage from one of difference to one of “sameness.” In the process, homosexual couples are asked to be viewed as having what Robert J. Colbert terms the “unmarked body” that is as an entity liberated from the taint of politics and social stigma. As one gay and gender studies scholar pointed this will constrain the GLBT community, make them more invisible, force their assimilation into the mainstream, and undermine the goals of gay liberation. Second, marry will not transform our society from one that makes narrow, but dramatic distinctions between those who are married and those who are not married to one that respects and encourages choice of relationships and family diversity.

The gettoknowusfirst mission alludes to this idea:

“Our goal is to put these images of gay and lesbian families on the air now. Our target audience is the person who voted for Proposition 8, but may not recall how s/he voted. Many people simply have no connection to marriage equality for gays and lesbians. Our ads will put our faces, and those of our children, on the issue. They will plant a seed. Some people will understand immediately. For others, the idea will grow slowly. Ultimately, people will change their minds and support marriage equality after they get to know us.”

This is an example of one of the PSAs. The imagery and symbolism of family, togetherness, monogamy, racial equality (they are a Hispanic couple) all demonstrate references to heterosexual ideas of marriage. A Matter of a fact, you could substitute a heterosexual couple into this narrative without skipping a beat or losing our idea of a “shared meaning” of marriage. Also notice the change in tactics from the videos you viewed above to the ones from the gettoknowusfirst campaign.

Overall Argument

I argue that the discourses surrounding the gettoknowusfirst narratives reaffirm the dominant ideological view of heterosexual marriage. They do this through the employment of symbolic imagery, sentimentality and pathos to connote common shared meanings of heterosexual marriage. I also contend that three main themes inherent in the advancement of heterosexual marriage-that is religion, parenthood and race- are used to correspond to the sociological, moral, and historic arguments used against gay marriage (that is that the texts also reflect these themes, even though these are themes commonly used against their cause.) I conclude that the appeal to pathos in the end, may do more harm than good because the "staged circumstances" and imagery used to gain entry into the gay marriage debate are predicated on the patriarchal, misogynistic, and often narrow views of the dominant signification of heterosexual marriage.

The Discourses of Religion, Parenthood/Family and Race

In this section I look at the narratives of the five PSAs and also analyze the media discourses surrounding the topics of religion, family and race. I argue that these themes are central to the symbolism and imagery of the traditional and dominant ideology of heterosexual marriage. I argue that for gettoknowusfirst to “gain entry” into the debate, it neutralizes and humanizes these often controversial topics through sentimentality and emotive symbolism. The following PSA featuring two African-American males and their children demonstrates (quite blatantly in my opinion) the themes of Religion, Parenthood and Race. I expound on two of these themes for this presentation:

Religion

Religion is a key theme in this text and I argue that this is the most important reference used by the gettoknowusfirst . The Prop 8 debate, much like gay marriage nationally is framed to appear to be a civil and secular debate, but its essence lies within the spiritual, religious and the sacred. The main proponents of Prop 8 and the groups that raised the most money for its campaign were religious organizations (Latter-Day Saints raised nearly half the funds used during the campaign) I look at those discourses and I tie that to the imagery used in the PSAs. In this particular case, Xavier and Michael are praying at the table, also the references to “meeting in church” promote the dominant idea that Christian (mainly) ideals are at the heart of a successful and real marriage. Those outside of that construct are not enjoying the true benefits of marriage.

Family & Parenthood

Xavier & Michael are seen sitting on lawn chairs as they watch a group of kids and young adults playing basketball and hopscotch. This connotes togetherness and “nuclear family.” The appearance of children in this commercial reinforces the procreative aspects of heterosexual marriage and acknowledges the predominant heterosexual view that a nuclear family is natural and constant, rather than social constructed. These images speak to the criticisms lodged by proponents of Prop 8 that view homosexual relationships as being ‘detrimental to the safety and well-being of children.” Other imagery used include a “full table of food” meaning that there seems to be “plenty.” The two men also mention seem to be “doing well” advancing the dominant ideology that heterosexual marriages are more productive, more stable, they eat better and have more general health. Xavier also mentions that he “knew this was the man for me” referencing the view that heterosexual marriages that are monogamous, long-term and romantic are the “proper” expressions of heterosexual love. This is an indirect response to the discourses of surrounding the Prop 8 debate that argued a “slippery slope” that included rampant adultery, polygamy, and bestiality as possibilities if gay marriage is allowed.

I also analyze the gettoknowusfirst logo which depicts gay and lesbian couples with children. This is interesting, because in the end, it supports the dominant view that heterosexual marriage exists for the creation of kids. Gay couples, especially those who adopt, will for the most part always have to look “outside their relationships” in order to include kids. This fact was used in the Prop 8 debate to prove that gay marriages are not natural because they must still depend on true “heterosexual’ couples to produce kids for them to adopt or conceive (other more fabricated means of gaining a child are even seen as being ‘not natural” for heterosexual couples-i.e. the negative connotation of a “test tube baby.”)