25 Aug What you think is your best piece of writing and why.
Assignment:
Your work for the quarter has concluded with the production of final drafts of three papers all focusing on argument. Think about your development as a writer during the past quarter. Follow the guidelines and letter format provided in A Writer’s Reference, C4: pps. 36-41.
Prompt
Discuss the following in 600 – 700 words.
What you think is your best piece of writing and why.
What you learned about the course theme.
How you discovered and developed your ideas, thesis, subclaims, reasons, analysis, and the other elements of your arguments.
Your development as an analytic writer.
How you have developed as a critical reader of what you read for class, including your peers’ arguments.
The links you discovered between the course readings.
What you have learned about academic arguments in general.
Academic Integrity Pledge: Include as a comment
Follow MLA conventions for papers and the Works Cited pages in A Writer’s Reference under the MLA tab. Upload all drafts to Turnitin before the deadline.
FORMAT GUIDELINES
1. File Type: Word document
2. Word or page count: 600 – 700 words minimum (do not use quotations or paraphrases)>
3. Margins, Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt, 1″ margins
4. Citations: MLA (Review the MLA tab in A Writer’s Reference)
I have attached below my three assignments the proposal, the research and the annontation bibliography.
Requirements: 700 words
Malak Alazzawi
Prof. Haydee Smith
MCWP 50R
August 7,2023
The Impact of Proposition 8 and President Obama’s Position on Same-Sex Marriage on LGBT Political Mobilization and Community Activism in the United States: An Annotated Bibliography
Research Question
How did the 2008 California Proposition 8 and President Obama’s lack of support for same-sex marriage impact the political mobilization and community activism of the LGBT community in the United States?
Annotated Bibliography
Burack, Cynthia. “Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) Human Rights Assistance in the Time of Trump.” Politics & Gender, vol. 14, no. 4, 2018, pp. 561–80,.
According to Burack (2018), the U.S. government was slow to advocate for and provide international support for SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) human rights. In international advocacy efforts, the U.S. followed other countries and global organizations, LGBTQ organizations, and traditional human rights organizations. But in 2011, the U.S. supported SOGI human rights advocacy, increased public awareness, and institutionalized its efforts. Evidence supporting international worries about a potential U.S. failure on its obligation to promote grassroots advocacy for sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) human rights is included in Burack’s (2018) analysis. For the purpose of evaluating the U.S. commitment to SOGI human rights, the author concentrates on the need for such support and emphasizes current data points. The author thoroughly explains the international background and the potential consequences of U.S. actions—or lack thereof—in this field by exploring both the demand and supply elements of U.S. involvement in SOGI human rights.
Burack’s (2018) source is essential to the academic debate, especially regarding foreign policy and human rights. By illuminating the U.S.’s tardy response and subsequent efforts after 2011, the author’s analysis of the U.S. government’s involvement with sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) human rights fills a gap in the literature. Using proof highlighting global issues and data points indicating the U.S. commitment to SOGI human rights strengthens the validity of the author’s material. The generalizability of the results is impacted by limitations, such as the absence of research participants, which must be acknowledged. International policymakers looking for information on the U.S. government’s engagement in SOGI human rights are the target audience for this study. Burack’s research, published in a peer-reviewed journal, strengthens the scientific debate on this significant subject.
By offering evidence that supports the claim that Obama’s position on SOGI human rights affected the formation of various organizations working to promote equal rights for the LGBT community, Burack’s (2018) source is consistent with the research study. In order to achieve equal rights and stop discrimination based on sexual orientation, the source emphasizes the value of cooperation. The results reported by Burack highlight the significance of local activity and global assistance in achieving SOGI human rights. It supports the claim that Obama’s position had broader effects than just the specific policy outcome, inspiring activists and enabling the expansion of groups working to advance LGBT rights. The source improves knowledge of how social and political movements can affect the landscape of LGBT rights advocacy by highlighting the impact of Proposition 8 on organizational development and cooperative efforts.
Bratica, Robyn B. “Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues in Schools: Advocacy, Research, and Global Perspectives: Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Schooling: The Nexus of Research, Practice, and Policy. Edited by Stephen T. Russell and Stacey S. Horn. Sex Roles, vol. 78, no. 3-4, Springer US, 2018, pp. 309–10,.
The key contention made by Bratica (2018) is that recent policy modifications in California, as well as in Australia, Spain, and Italy, have resulted in the adoption of anti-homophobia legislation in schools. The author highlights the trends in these areas, where new research and evolving laws have helped create rights for LGBT youth. The central assertion emphasizes the systemic nature of sexual orientation and gender identity issues in educational settings and contends that policy reforms are vital in establishing supportive and safe school environments for students. The emphasis on systemic interventions and change tactics highlights the significance of addressing these problems locally and globally. The fundamental contention that policy changes have taken place regarding how LGBT children are treated is supported by the evidence provided by Bratica (2018). Studies by Rivers and Noret (2008) and Savage (2010) indicate the difficulties LGBT students encounter, while the 2015 National School Climate Survey by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network reveals significant rates of feeling uncomfortable among LGBT students. This data emphasizes the requirement for legislative modifications to combat discrimination against LGBT children and establish safer environments in California, where Proposition 8 has had catastrophic outcomes.
By researching legislation changes and their effects on how LGBT adolescents are treated, Bratica’s (2018) source significantly contributes to the scholarly conversation. The source notably discusses how the LGBT community was impacted by Proposition 8 in California and President Obama’s early hesitation to accept same-sex weddings. The results are more trustworthy when statistical analysis is used, as was done for the 2015 National School Climate Survey. The limited sample size, however, is a drawback of the source and may limit the conclusions’ capacity to be generalized. Researchers, decision-makers, and educators interested in learning how policies may affect LGBT youths’ experiences and well-being are the target audience for this site. The source emphasizes the importance of reforming policies to give this marginalized minority safe and welcoming places. Its peer-reviewed journal publishing and empirical support give the source legitimacy in the scholarly discussion of LGBT issues.
My research paper examines how Proposition 8 and President Obama’s position on same-sex marriage have affected LGBT political mobilization and community action in the United States. Bratica’s (2018) source is a wonderful fit. The source sheds light on legislative shifts and how they affect how LGBT adolescents are treated, including the background of California’s Proposition 8 and Obama’s initial hesitation to embrace same-sex unions. I can include proof of how policy choices affected the experiences and activity of the LGBT community by using this source. The source has shaped and affected my argument by emphasizing the importance of policy changes in establishing secure and welcoming surroundings, inspiring the neighborhood to mobilize as an advocate for its rights. It improves my comprehension of how political choices, community activism, and the struggle against discrimination based on sexual orientation interact.
Chase, Anthony Tirado. “Human Rights Contestations: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.” The International Journal of Human Rights, vol. 20, no. 6, 2016, pp. 703–23,.
The article’s central argument is that marginalized groups use SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) rights as a weapon in their fight for equality. The data cited emphasizes the state’s targeting of sexual and gender minorities, such as in California, focusing on upholding traditional values, which lends credence to this assertion. The author contends that states’ deliberate political tactics that target and demonize SOGI rights are based on ingrained social prejudices. Further evidence of the political utility of opposing SOGI-related rights is provided by the participation of conservative religious actors and resistance at the international level, including the OIC. The data points to struggles for SOGI rights being a reaction to this targeting instead of the driving force behind it. The author argues that these conflicts have the potential to redefine human rights as a weapon and a site of conflict, increasing their importance and influence. The reference to Proposition 8 serves as an illustration of how SOGI rights are demonized.
Chase (2016) adds to the scholarly conversation about SOGI rights and their function as a weapon of struggle. It examines how political tactics, human rights, and governmental discrimination against sexual and gender minorities intersect. The source can be trusted since it has undergone peer review, guaranteeing that the research and analyses have been thoroughly examined. The fact that the source is a theoretical investigation and analysis of current dynamics and trends rather than an experimental study poses a constraint. Scholars, researchers, and decision-makers interested in global politics, LGBT problems, and human rights should use this site. The source’s author wants to challenge the legitimacy and consequences of human rights in the face of opposition and targeting and shed light on the political aspects of SOGI rights efforts. The source’s peer-reviewed status and theoretical foundation increase its legitimacy.
My research on the effects of Proposition 8 and President Obama’s stance on same-sex marriage on LGBT political mobilization and community involvement in the United States is consistent with Chase’s (2016) source. The source offers proof that Proposition 8 established a climate that permitted the LGBT population to be targeted. The claim that Proposition 8 was a component of a more significant trend of demonizing and marginalizing LGBT people is supported by the author’s research of political techniques used by states and conservative religious actors to oppose SOGI rights. I may support my case regarding the detrimental effects of Proposition 8 on the LGBT community, notably in terms of increased targeting and discrimination, by using this source to include the data and arguments offered. The source has affected and informed my thesis by giving a more comprehensive view of the political forces at play and highlighting the relevance of Proposition 8 as a trigger for targeting and resistance.
Fisher, Shauna F. “Before the Wedding Dance: Citizen Policymaking on Same-Sex Marriage.” California Journal of Politics and Policy, vol. 9, no. 3, 2017, pp. 1–30,.
According to Fisher (2017), LGBT activists used weaker framing techniques than their opponents during the California Proposition 8 vote. Instead of making emotional appeals, they focused on impersonal concepts of equality and anti-discrimination, failed to engage their opponents properly, addressed issues about schoolchildren, or highlighted same-sex couples’ experiences. These elements might have contributed to their campaign setback, which resulted in the passage of the law that constitutionally forbids same-sex unions. This emphasizes the need for activist groups to employ successful tactics in advancing their position through the creation of policy or electoral politics. Fisher (2017) thoroughly studies the framing tactics used by different organizations during the Proposition 22 and Proposition 8 campaigns. The author gathered press releases and political advertisements from numerous organizations supporting and against same-sex marriage to record their arguments. The author consulted archival versions of the websites for campaigns including Protect Marriage, No on Knight, and No on 8.
The research on the effects of framing tactics used by LGBT activists and their opponents during ballot measure campaigns is furthered by Fisher’s (2017) paper. Fisher offers helpful insights into how activists interact with their opponents and perhaps change their framing methods in following campaigns by examining press releases and political advertising from the Proposition 22 and Proposition 8 campaigns. The process used by the author, which involved accessing archived websites and gathering information from credible organizations, improves the accuracy of the data presented. However, limitations, such as author bias during data collection, could affect how the results are interpreted. LGBT activists and academics interested in political mobilization and campaign tactics comprise most of the article’s audience. Fisher’s work, published in a peer-reviewed journal, displays credibility and advances knowledge of the complex dynamics of same-sex marriage proposals and the function of framing tactics in political action.
Fisher’s (2017) research has significantly impacted the research project’s arguments. The study examines the framing tactics used by LGBT activists and their opponents during the Proposition 22 and Proposition 8 campaigns. It offers insightful information regarding the dynamics of ballot measure campaigns involving same-sex marriage. Fisher demonstrates the absence of interaction between activists and the sparse usage of specific frameworks by both sides by examining news releases and political advertising. This study contributes to our knowledge of the LGBT community’s political involvement and grassroots activity in reaction to these measures. It emphasizes the significance of framing methods and their possible effects on the success or failure of campaigns for same-sex marriage. The case that effective framing and engagement methods are essential for the LGBT community’s political mobilization and the development of their rights is strengthened by including Fisher’s results.
Flores, Andrew R. “Persuasion and Ballot Initiatives: How Persuasive Were the Televised Campaign Ads on Same-Sex Marriage?” Politics, Groups & Identities, vol. 7, no. 1, 2019, pp. 177–93,
The main argument presented in the paper by Flores (2019) is that broadcast anti-marriage equality campaign advertising had a more substantial influence on shifting public perceptions than ads favoring marriage equality. The author contends that when opposing viewpoints frame sexual and gender minorities’ rights, those in opposition still have a leg up in influencing the public through televised media. The author uses Zaller’s (1992) receive-accept-sample (RAS) framework of opinion development and attitude change as part of the evidence. According to the framework, persuasive communications that cause anxiety and emphasize loss are more likely to be considered and accepted by the target audience. This demonstrates that the LGBT community was motivated to mobilize and fight against discrimination due to Proposition 8 and the broadcast advertising against marriage equality.
The source by Flores (2019), which examines how televised political advertisements affect public perceptions of same-sex marriage, adds to the academic topic. The persuasive effects of these advertisements are examined using a research paradigm, especially Zaller’s (1992) receive-accept-sample (RAS) approach. The source is credible since it has undergone peer review and uses information from the Campaign Media Analysis Group (CMAG), a dependable source for monitoring campaign advertisements. The study’s reliance on secondary data, which could have data quality and completeness issues, is a restriction. This source is intended for academics, researchers, and decision-makers curious about the dynamics of political campaigns and the impact of television media on public opinion. The source aims to examine how well political advertisements influence public opinion on same-sex unions. The source has standing in the academic community due to its peer-reviewed status and usage of data analysis.
My study project is complemented by the source by Flores (2019). This source will allow me to investigate the impact of television political advertisements on popular perceptions of same-sex marriage, which is directly related to understanding the dynamics of political mobilization and activism. The findings indicating the advertising opposing marriage equality had a more significant impact than the ones in favor were insightful into the difficulties the LGBT community has in the struggle for equal rights. This source has impacted and shaped my thesis by underlining the significance of strategic messaging and framing in political campaigns and the potential obstacles to changing the public’s perception of same-sex marriage. It emphasizes the necessity of persuasive messaging and counterstrategies to overcome resistance and rally support among the LGBT community.
Mello, Joe. “The Right Stuff? Assessing the Use of Rights Discourse in Same-Sex Marriage Ballot Measure Campaigns.” Polity, vol. 51, no. 4, 2019, pp. 724–48,.
Mello’s (2019) article’s central claim is to assess the framing tactics proposed by same-sex marriage proponents in U.S. state ballot measure campaigns, concentrating on the efficacy of various frames like family, fairness, equal rights, and unforeseen consequences. A content study of political commercials from 2008 to 2012 served as the article’s source of proof. With the help of descriptive statistics and illustrative examples, the study investigates the occurrence and trends of these frames across various campaigns. The article aims to evaluate the effect of framing tactics on the results of the ballot measures through an analysis of the content of the campaign commercials. The evidence contributes to our understanding of effective communication tactics in pushing for marriage equality and sheds light on how same-sex marriage proponents framed their arguments throughout this time.
The research on the framing techniques same-sex marriage advocates use in ballot measure campaigns is relevant to Mello’s (2019) paper. It adds to the body of literature by evaluating the efficacy of various frames employed in these campaigns, concentrating on the circumstances surrounding California’s Proposition 8. Since the article has received thorough scrutiny by subject-matter experts and has been peer-reviewed, it may be regarded as reliable. The study’s findings are given more authority by using content analysis and statistics, providing proof for the assertions made. One drawback of the study is that it only analyses the text of campaign commercials, which may not fully represent the framing techniques’ complexity. The target audience for this article is academics, researchers, and policymakers interested in learning how framing techniques affect the results of ballot proposals on same-sex marriage. Its goal is to advance the academic conversation on effective communication tactics for promoting marriage equality and to provide guidance for upcoming political campaigns.
My research project examines the effects of Proposition 8 and President Obama’s stance on LGBT political mobilization and community activism in the United States, and the source by Mello (2019) examines framing strategies in same-sex marriage ballot measure campaigns, particularly California’s Proposition 8. This source offers insightful information on the efficacy of same-sex marriage supporters’ communication strategies. The framing strategies used in these campaigns were examined, which added to our understanding of how messaging affects public opinion and mobilizes support for LGBT rights. Together, these works offer a thorough understanding of the factors influencing LGBT political engagement and the tactics used by various actors. For example, Fisher (2017) examined the effects of Proposition 8 and President Obama’s stance on LGBT political mobilization. Flores (2019) investigated the impact of televised campaign ads on attitudes toward same-sex marriage.
Daigle, Megan, and Henri Myrttinen. “Bringing Diverse Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) into Peacebuilding Policy and Practice.” Gender and Development, vol. 26, no. 1, 2018, pp. 103–20,.
The needs and experiences of people with different sexual orientations and gender identities (SOGI) have allegedly been overlooked in peacebuilding research, policy, and practice, according to Daigle and Myrttinen (2018). Their fundamental argument is that various SOGI issues must be included in discussing gender in humanitarian aid and peacebuilding. The authors’ argument is backed up by primary research in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colombia, Nepal, and Lebanon and a global review of published research. In order to show the range of violence experienced by people who do not fit into conventional gender categories and how conflict and displacement increase their vulnerabilities, they present empirical evidence from various sources. To effectively address these difficulties, the authors stress the importance of using various SOGI approaches in peacebuilding and humanitarian efforts. The writers support their argument and push for including various SOGI issues in peacebuilding efforts by outlining their research and analysis.
By addressing a significant gap in research, policy, and practice, Daigle and Myrttinen’s (2018) source on including multiple sexual orientations and gender identities (SOGI) in peacebuilding adds to the academic discussion. It highlights how SOGI issues are neglected in peacebuilding attempts and promote their inclusion in humanitarian and gender frameworks. Due to the thorough review process, it can be regarded as reputable since it was a peer-reviewed publication. Scholars, decision-makers, practitioners, and organizations involved in peacebuilding, gender equality, and human rights make up the target audience for this source. Its goal is to promote the integration of various SOGI concerns in efforts to promote peace and provide humanitarian aid, emphasizing the significance of addressing the vulnerabilities encountered by those who do not fit neatly into the binary gender categories. It contributes to broader discussions on SOGI rights and their inclusion into peacebuilding efforts since it discusses the development of the LGBT community following the passage of Proposition 8.
The study on the effects of Proposition 8 and President Obama’s stance on LGBT political mobilization and community activity is pertinent to the source by Daigle and Myrttinen (2018). The source emphasizes the significance of identifying and attending to the needs and experiences of people who do not fit neatly into one of the binary gender categories by including various SOGI concerns in peacebuilding. This aligns with the overarching objective of comprehending how discriminatory laws like Proposition 8 affect the LGBT community and their efforts to mobilize. The source sheds light on the difficulties faced by various SOGI groups and the possibility of inclusive activism and peacebuilding by evaluating the experiences of various SOGI groups in various countries. This can help us understand how Proposition 8 influenced the LGBT community’s advocacy and mobilization in the United States.
Malak Alazzawi
MCWP 50R
Prof. Haydee Smith
July 28, 2023
California Proposition 8 and the President’s Lack of Support and the LGBT Community
Liberals across the United States and globally celebrated the victory of President Barack Obama as the first African American to clinch the topmost seat in the country. His victory was viewed as the climax of Martin Luther King Jr.’s vision of racial equality and achievement of the lengthy struggle for civil rights. While the Californians had strongly voted for President Obama, they had also passed Proposition 8, which illegalized same-sex marriages, mystifying many observers. Although same-sex marriage was seen as the civil rights of the time, it was supposed that California was at the forefront of the civil rights movement. In this advocacy, it emerged that President Obama and the American government did not support same-sex marriage. Therefore, it is notable that the U.S. government was slow in advocating and supporting SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) human rights. In the international sphere, the United States followed the stance of other countries and global, LGBTQ, and traditional human rights. However, 2011 marked a turning point in the U.S. stance to support and advocate for SOGI human rights, increase awareness, and institutionalize its efforts (Burack 562).
Research Question
This research paper will explore the question; how did the 2008 California Proposition 8 and President Obama’s lack of support for same-sex marriage impact the political mobilization and community activism of the LGBT community in the United States? This question holds high-level significance in various spheres, including the political and civil rights realms. It is significant to ask this question to explore the historical context of same-sex couple rights. The 2008 California Proposition 8, and Obama’s lack of support for same-sex marriage, threatened marriage equality and the historical rights of the LGBTQ community in the United States, as well as cultivated a homophobic environment in the State (Sinatra). Therefore, exploring this question provides an opportunity to pursue in-depth research on the historical context and transitions in same-sex marriage rights in the United States. Furthermore, it is essential to acknowledge that asking this question could be crucial to identifying the impacts of this law and the lack of the President’s support on political mobilization as well as activism in the LGBTQ community.
Exploring the impacts of Proposition 8 and the lack of the President’s support for same-sex marriage can be crucial to evaluate the legal and political implications. It is crucial to acknowledge that Proposition 8 aimed to illegalize same-sex marriage; however, President Obama’s stance has evolved significantly (Lewis and Gossett 6). As a result, asking this question is crucial to understanding the dynamics of the LGBTQ community’s activism, especially regarding grassroots movements, legal struggles, and political decision-making. When Proposition 8 was passed in 2008, by 2011, the support for Same-sex marriages had risen by 13 per cent, which indicates how fast LGBTQ community activism rose (Newport 3). Notably, asking this question is crucial to assess the social movement dynamics by exploring the relationship or connection between political occurrences and LGBTQ activism.
Exploring this question could be fundamental to understanding the interaction of political decisions with social movements, including how they impact each other. Through this question, it is possible to explore the intersectionality between LGBTQ activism and collectivism or coalition building. This research allows an in-depth exploration of the strategies, partnerships, and community organizations in response to Proposition 8 effects. Thus, this question allows one to deeply investigate how the LGBTQ community formed coalitions, alliances, and engaged community groups to pursue social justice, highlighting the intersectionality between activism and LGBTQ’s collective action.
Therefore, by exploring this question, this project hopes to unveil the impacts of these political events (i.e., proposition 8) on the LGBTQ+ population and their commitment to activism. Furthermore, completing this project will help identify the impact or influence of Proposition 8 and Obama’s lack of support for gay marriage right on the LGBTQ+ population’s engagement in collective actions and social justice movements. As a result, this research will be crucial to highlighting the impacts of political decisions on activism and efforts by any community to organize against real or perceived injustices. In addition, the exploration of this question can shed light on social impacts, such as crimes stemming from Proposition 8. Some of the social issues that have been reported to increase due to Proposition 8 include homophobic bullying (Hatzenbuehler et al. 2). By utilizing several studies that have been conducted to evaluate the prevalence of social issues such as homophobic bullying from the point when Proposition 8 was ratified, this research will elucidate the major social effects that have had pronounced elevations as a result of Proposition 8 (Raphael 476).
Moreover, proposition 8 had a profound impact on public opinion about same-sex marriages. The legislation sparked public debates and discourse that led to a shift in public opinion regarding same-sex marriages and the rights of the LGBTQ community. This is because the legislation somewhat denied equal dignity and respect to same-sex couples. Proposition 8’s classification reserved the term “marriage” for opposite-sex couples and “domestic partnership” for same-sex couples. This denied same-sex couples the equal dignity and respect that is accorded to opposite-sex couples through the term “Marriage” (Salas 550). As a result, this was perceived as a violation of various fundamental constitutional rights, which sparked a shift in public opinion about same-sex marriages (Salas 559). Through this research, it is possible to identify the objective data that affirms the direction of the shift and to determine how same-sex marriages were perceived after the ratification of Proposition 8. Also, the research will highlight whether same-sex marriages or the LGBTQ community were granted equal civil rights, an essential factor that impacts the American right to liberty (Kies 13).
Research Conversation
A major realization for exploring this research and question is that Proposition 8 and Obama’s stance sparked controversy and mobilization, especially among the supporters and opponents of the gay-marriage rights (Cummings 4). There is also a major realization that after the enactment of Proposition 8, there was a significant increase in LGBTQ organizations, and more people became more involved in active politics and activism, which formed the entry point for this research (Brena 135). Furthermore, the changing Obama’s stance on gay-marriage rights forms another crucial element that could guide the topic on the impacts of Proposition 8 and the President’s lack of support for the LGBTQ community. Therefore, analyzing President Obama’s stance on Proposition 8 and the evolution of his support for gay-marriage rights could be crucial to exploring the impact of political leadership on the rise and sustainability of social movements.
It is essential to acknowledge that an exploration of this research unveiled the aspects of LGBTQ community activism and mobilization, providing a background for how Proposition 8 and related events influenced the collaborations and alliance formations, civil movements, and public demonstrations (Brena). Additionally, learning the far-reaching impacts of Proposition 8 and the lack of government support for gay-couple rights would be crucial to exploring these events’ social and legal implications. Exploring these events and their implications can be crucial to examine the progress on LGBTQ rights, prejudice or discrimination they experience, and overall social dialogue on same-sex marriage.
Search Strategy
An in-depth exploration of the identified research question would require a combination of primary and secondary sources. Primary sources for this exercise include campaign materials, legal documents, interviews on the subject or topic, media coverage, and speeches, among others. Secondary resources for this activity include scholarly articles, reports, website articles, books, and new articles covering the emergence of LGBTQ activism since 2008 and political mobilization in these groups.
While both primary and secondary sources carry high-level significance in completing this exercise, I found secondary sources such as reports, scholarly articles, and books as the most useful since they provide comprehensive evaluation, interpretation, and synthesis of available information. As such, these sources can be found in databases such as Google Scholar, JSTOR, and ProQuest, as well as Google Search, which can be crucial to accessing academic papers and scholarly materials to answer the question. YouTube could also be crucial to accessing visual resources, library catalogs, reputable new outlets, and LGBTQ-focused websites to help access reliable sources for this research.
Research Challenge
There are specific challenges associated with conducting this research. One of the primary issues includes the challenge of obtaining sufficient resources to comprehensively analyze the implications of Proposition 8 and President Obama’s stance against gay-couple rights. Additionally, considering the limited time required to complete this project, the time constraint is a major problem associated with challenges in managing the timeline. A potential solution to the challenge of acquiring sufficient sources can be to utilize academic databases, consult library catalogs and librarians, and consult research mentors, experts, and peers. Additionally, for effective project management, developing a timeline and designing a project calendar will help overcome this.
Works Cited
Brena, Maria Claudia. “The Effects of Proposition 8 in the LGBT Rights Movement in Orange County.” e-Research: A Journal of Undergraduate Work 1.3 (2014): 3.
Burack, Cynthia. “Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) Human Rights Assistance in the Time of Trump.” Politics & Gender 14.4 (2018): 561-580.
Cummings, Scott L. “Rethinking the foundational critiques of lawyers in social movements.” Fordham L. Rev. 85 (2016): 1987.
Hatzenbuehler, Mark L., et al. “Proposition 8 and homophobic bullying in California.” Pediatrics 143.6 (2019).
Kies, Addie V. “‘Til Proposition 8 Do Us Part: The Rise and Fall of Same-Sex Marriage in California.” Rich. JL & Pub. Int. 12 (2008): 265.
Lewis, Gregory B., and Charles W. Gossett. “Why did Californians pass Proposition 8? Stability and change in public support for same-sex marriage.” California Journal of Politics and Policy 3.1 (2011).
Newport, Frank. “For first time, majority of Americans favor legal gay marriage.” Gallup Politics (2011).
Raphael, Steven. “The deterrent effects of California’s proposition 8: weighing the evidence.” Criminology & Public Policy 5.3 (2006): 471-478.
Salas, Richard. “In re Marriage Cases: The Fundamental Right to Marry and Equal Protection Under the California Constitution and the Effects of Proposition 8.” Hastings Const. LQ 36 (2008): 545.
Sinatra, Christine. “Political Controversies about marginalized groups increase bullying in youths.” UT News, 13 May 2019.
Tsai, Robert L. “Obama’s Conversion on Same-Sex Marriage: The Social Foundations of Individual Rights.” Conn. L. Rev. 50 (2018): 1.
Malak Alazzawi
Prof. Haydee Smith
MCWP 50R
August 20, 2023
California’s Proposition 8, which as noted by Fisher (1) was a state ballot initiative that constitutionally banned same sex marriage, had some impacts on LGBTQ political mobilization and community activism. It is important to define what political mobilization and community activism entail for better understanding of the essay, which is majorly centred on the two terms. The term political mobilization refers to the act or process of organising people and social units like groups and organizations to achieve the intended political goals (Oberschall). Community activism term refers to vigorous engagement and campaigning against something especially at the community level. The above results are also similar to what President’s Obama position regarding same-sex marriage stance produced. The two happenings increased push and efforts for legal equality and societal acceptance in the United States of America. In the recent past, there has an increase in the rise of LGBTQ awareness in the Unites States. Simply put, proposition 8 and Obama’s position on same-sex marriage acted as catalysts for increasing political mobilization and activism within the community. Scholars such as Fisher in his article has delved into the issue especially regarding impacts of the proposition 8 in California and the whole of America as the impacts quickly spread to other areas. The passing of proposition 8 of 2008 was a turning point that propelled the LGBTQ community to heighten their activism and mobilization, thus leading to significant social and political changes. Through this proposition 8, marriage was strictly defined as a union between a woman and a man, thus directly challenging the recognition and rights of same-sex marriages (Fisher 4). The above-noted outcome shocked and disappointed LGBTQ community members. This is since members perceived the amendments brought by the proposition as being unjust, disruptive, and invasive, and this also explains why they were determined to fight back and resist the discriminating policy (Fisher 9). Individuals tend to fight back when they feel that they are being discriminated against or their personal space is being invaded.
LGBTQ community members also felt that their rights which were being enjoyed previously courtesy of the Supreme Court decision in Baker vs. Nelson (1999) as noted by Fisher (3) had been taken away by proposition 8. Thus, this aggravation of being stripped of their rights created a sense of solidarity and urgency among the members of the LGBTQ. Community leaders and advocacy groups emerged, and they took the initiative to organize rallies, protests, and campaigns; the media especially social media played a crucial role in amplifying activism efforts and ensuring the message reached a wider audience. This was a turning point in the use of technology for political organizing. Activists utilized platforms like Facebook and Twitter to share personal stories, rally support, and raise awareness about the consequences of the proposition 8. YouTube was also used as per Fisher (5) for the above-noted activities. Online campaigns, petitions, and viral videos helped spread the message and mobilized a broader community. Additionally, Proposition 8 led to the emergence of new leaders and organizations within the LGBTQ+ movement. Grassroots organizations like “No on 8” and “Courage Campaign” played instrumental roles in coordinating protests, rallies, and public awareness campaigns (Fisher 5). These groups engaged in innovative tactics, such as creating heart-warming stories that resonated with a wide audience, fostering empathy, and changing minds. Furthermore, the passage of Proposition 8 prompted LGBTQ+ activists to form coalitions with other social justice movements. Such scoalitions included Gay and Lesbian Alliance against Defamation’s (GLAAD) as noted by Fisher (5). They recognized the intersections of discrimination and inequality and collaborated with women’s rights, civil rights, and progressive organizations. This cross-movement solidarity strengthened their collective voice and allowed them to tap into broader networks of support.
The epitome of the heightened activism due to the passage and enactment of Proposition 8 is a series of legal battles, which showcased the resilience of LGBTQ activists (Kies 40). Numerous lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the proposition were brought before numerous courts in the United States of America. These suits elevated the issue to a national level, drawing attention from advocates and opponents across the country. They also provided opportunities for education and dialogue, further amplifying the activism’s impact. One of such cases as noted by Fisher (4) is Strauss vs. Horton in 2009. However, in the above-noted case, the Supreme Court sitting in California ruled that proposition 8 was a valid law. Further, the court upheld marriage licenses of those same-sex couples who had been married prior to the passing and enactment of proposition 8. Other cases included a petition filed in the US District Court for California’s Northern District by David Boies and Theodore Olson as noted by Fisher (4), among others. Generally, the LGBTQ reaction to Proposition 8 was not only a rejection but also ushered in a new era full of determination to demand social acceptance and equal rights.
Conversely, Obama’s shifting position on same sex marriages also triggered a lot of reaction from the members of the LGBTQ community in the United States and even promoted political mobilization and activism among the community members and supporters. Initially, President Obama did not support same-sex marriage during his 2008 campaigns (Mello 17). However, President Obama’s stand regarding the issue of same sex marriage drastically changed as is evident in his 2012 campaigns, where he announced that he was now supporting same sex marriage (Mello 17). Barack Obama’s initial reluctance to openly support same-sex marriage had significant effects on community activism and the political mobilization of the LGBTQ community in the United States. Additionally, his evolving stance on the same sex marriage issue, from opposition to eventual support, highlighted the complex interplay between leadership, public opinion, and grassroots advocacy.
During President Obama’s first presidential campaign in 2008, he positioned himself as a proponent of LGBTQ rights but stopped short of endorsing same-sex marriage. This vigilant approach by President Obama emanated from the broader social context of that time, where public opinion on the issue was extremely divided. While some progressive voices within the LGBTQ community hoped for swift change, others understood the political challenges that such a stance could present. Obama’s shyness to endorse marriage equality resulted in frustrating some LGBTQ activists, who saw the omission as a missed opportunity to champion their cause. Advocacy groups, community organizers, and grassroots activists were psyched up to fill this leadership emptiness and push for change from their positions.
The absence of support from the president’s office fostered a sense of urgency within the LGBTQ community, prompting them to engage in more direct and focused efforts. This period of grassroots activism was marked by the emergence of organizations like the Marriage Equality USA (MEU) and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) which channelled the energy of the LGBTQ community into coordinated campaigns aimed at raising awareness, changing public opinion, and pressuring lawmakers to reconsider their stances on same-sex marriage. Activists organized rallies, engaged in civil disobedience, and leveraged social media to amplify their message and counter prevailing narratives.
President Barrack Obama’s eventual shift towards supporting same-sex marriage in 2012 was influenced by both changing societal attitudes and the persistent advocacy of the LGBTQ community. His announcement marked a watershed moment, signalling a shift in mainstream politics and catalyzing broader discussions about equality and civil rights. Obama affirmed his change in an ABC interview, where he said,
“At a certain point I just concluded, for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.” (MacAskill & Gabbatt)
However, some activists remained critical, viewing his change in stance as politically calculated rather than rooted in genuine advocacy (Cummings 21). While Barrack Obama’s support for marriage equality was a significant step forward, it also highlighted the complexities of political mobilization and community activism. His cautious approach demonstrated the need for leaders to balance their personal convictions with the broader political landscape. The delay in support may have fuelled a sense of scepticism within the LGBTQ community, underscoring the importance of consistent and principled leadership in advancing social change.
Nonetheless, it was a win for the LGBTQ community members when President Obama changed his stance in 2012’s campaigns. The shift showed that continued activism and political mobilization by community members was swaying public members and political leaders. In fact, more Americans (48%) were now supporting same sex marriage in 2012 compared to those who were opposing the same (43%) and this was in contradiction of the 2008 figures as per the Pew Research Centre’s investigations (Mello 17). Gaining support from a politician like Obama helped the LGBTQ community to be proactive and more engaged in fighting and advocating for equality, hence the shift in percentage of supporters. Additionally, more politicians joined the cause after President Obama’s 2012 stance. Such politicians included Dianne Feinstein and Arnold Schwarzenegger. The above politicians even openly opposed Proposition 8 on their homepage as noted by Fisher (9) and this made activists use their pictures in their campaigns, such as the No on 8 campaigns. Activists were using the above-noted leaders’ pictures to sway the public into supporting their overall arguments about fairness and equality, especially regarding same sex marriages (Tsai, 34). Thus, the above scenario shows how the support of a leader can influence their rightful place in society. President Barrack Obama’s shifting position on same sex marriages also contributed to solidarity and collective identity among LGBTQ members (Raphael 473). For example, it can be argued that his support in 2012 gave members of LGBTQ community courage for collective identity and even heightened their advocacy efforts in various places including in institutions. Adolescents and children belonging to LGBTQ community tended to have low sense of school belonging compared to their heterosexual peers (Bratica). They also tend to exhibit heightened loneliness feelings and increased hostility towards others. The above-noted occurrences are due to things associated with LGBTQ community members’ sexual orientation. Such things include denial of certain rights, mocking, and name-calling. Initially, the above-noted things made it almost impossible for adolescent and children in the LGBTQ community to learn as was reflected in their poor performances and numerous cases of suicidal thoughts (Bratica). However, the above-noted issue reduced since 2012 as the community members became supported, thus positively impacting on advancement of solidarity and collective identity among LGBTQ members even in schools. It is due to these advancements that various human rights are now enjoyed by learners even in schools.
In the contemporary times, human rights surrounding gender identity and sexual orientation (SOGI) have played a pivotal role in fostering solidarity and cultivating a collective identity within the LGBTQ community around the world (Lewis, Gregory, & Charles 41) . These rights are not merely legal constructs; they embody the principles of dignity, equality, and respect for all individuals, regardless of their gender identity or sexual orientation (Chase 707). The recognition and protection of these rights have provided a framework for LGBTQ individuals to unite, advocate for change, and form a cohesive global community.
The fundamental principle of recognition and acceptance is at the heart of this solidarity within the LGBTQ community. The acknowledgment of LGBTQ rights as human rights signifies a paradigm shift towards inclusivity and equality. Historically marginalized and stigmatized, LGBTQ individuals have long sought validation and understanding. When societies and governments codify these rights into law, it sends a message that discrimination and prejudice are no longer acceptable. This validation fosters a sense of belonging and shared struggle among LGBTQ individuals worldwide (Chase 707). The common understanding that these rights are essential for all members of the community nurtures empathy and encourages support, creating a bond that transcends geographical and cultural boundaries.
One of the key elements that contribute to solidarity is the shared struggle for equal treatment and protection. Discrimination, violence, and exclusion based on gender identity and sexual orientation are unfortunately prevalent in many parts of the world (Daigle & Myrttinen 107). As LGBTQ individuals face similar challenges, the recognition of their rights has become a rallying point for collective action. Movements advocating for these rights have brought diverse voices together under a common goal, generating a sense of unity that extends beyond national borders (Newport 14). The global LGBTQ community draws strength from this interconnectedness, finding inspiration in the stories of those fighting for rights in different contexts.
Furthermore, human rights discourse has opened avenues for dialogue and education. Efforts to secure LGBTQ rights often involve educating societies about the complexities of gender identity and sexual orientation. This educational component fosters understanding and compassion among individuals who might not have previously encountered these concepts. As people become more informed about the experiences and challenges faced by LGBTQ individuals, they are more likely to empathize and show solidarity. This educational process creates bridges between LGBTQ communities and allies, promoting a broader sense of collective identity built on empathy and shared values. The universality of human rights principles, when applied to gender identity and sexual orientation, has also enabled LGBTQ activists to find common ground, strategize, and collaborate more effectively, especially through social media platforms. This digital connectivity has bolstered the community’s global collective identity by fostering a sense of participation and involvement in a broader movement.
It is also worth noting that proposition 8 and Obama’s position attracted numerous public opinions and the media, which have also significantly shaped the impact of the two key scenarios among the LGBTQ community. For example, media ads played a crucial role in supporting proposition 8; contributing to its promotion, while simultaneously galvanizing the LGBTQ community into a powerful force for social change. Media ads supporting proposition 8 primarily utilized emotional appeals and traditional values to sway public opinion or their perception towards LGBTQ community (Flores 180). These ads often depicted families and children, framing the issue as one of protecting traditional marriage and safeguarding children’s well-being. These ads sought to resonate with conservative audiences and those who held traditional beliefs about marriage and family, by invoking change and uncertainty’s fear. The media ads frequently invoked religious and moral arguments, aligning with the values of certain religious groups that opposed same-sex marriage. These ads portrayed marriage as a sacred institution and positioned proposition 8 as a defence against what was framed as the erosion of traditional values. By using emotional language and religious symbolism, the ads aimed to evoke a sense of urgency and importance among their target audience.
A media ad from “The Atlantic” campaigning for proposition. The ad shows the need to vote yes for proposition 8 because it will bring about equality and freedom for all (Cohen).
The media’s reach and repetition amplified the messaging of these ads, making them a prominent aspect of the proposition 8 campaign. The ubiquity of these ads meant that they had the potential to influence public opinion significantly. The steady stream of media coverage and advertisements normalized the idea that supporting proposition 8 was equivalent to upholding traditional values and preserving societal norms (Brena 12). However, the very media ads that supported proposition 8 inadvertently fuelled a robust wave of activism within the LGBTQ community and its allies. The ads portrayed same-sex relationships and marriages as something to be feared or rejected and this vilification prompted a strong counter-reaction from the LGBTQ community and its supporters, who recognized the need to defend their rights and relationships. Activists leveraged media outlets to counteract the negative portrayal by sharing personal stories, highlighting the humanity and love within same-sex relationships, and emphasizing the importance of equal rights. As the media ads continued to perpetuate divisive narratives, they inadvertently fostered empathy and solidarity among people who felt marginalized. The campaign against proposition 8 garnered significant media attention, allowing LGBTQ activists to share their stories, dispel stereotypes, and educate the public about the realities of their lives (Hatzenbuehler 33). This engagement catalyzed broader societal conversations about the importance of inclusivity, equal rights, and diversity. Still, since majority of the ads were aired by groups in support of proposition 8 or those against marriage equality, those ads in promotion of marriage equality were rendered fruitless as per Flores (177). But the above-noted notion changed especially when President Obama shifted to supporting marriage equality.
Although there has been great achievements witnessed from heightened activism and political mobilization of the LGBTQ community in America due to proposition 8 and President Obama’s stance, the journey has not been without challenges. One of the primary challenges faced by activists and LGBTQ community members in promoting same-sex marriage has been deeply ingrained cultural and religious beliefs (Salas 575). The United States is a diverse nation with a wide range of religious and cultural backgrounds. Some segments of society hold conservative viewpoints that oppose same-sex marriage based on religious teachings or traditional values. For example, religious individuals use the religious belief that same sex marriage is against the God’s will (Fisher 27). Overcoming these deeply rooted beliefs has required activists to engage in respectful dialogues, provide education about the separation of church and state, and appeal to shared values of love and commitment. Another challenge was the legal hurdle. Prior to the landmark Supreme Court case ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges [2015], which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide as per Flores (178), there was a patchwork of state laws that either banned or recognized such unions. This legal inconsistency created uncertainty and disparities for LGBTQ couples, making it a fearsome challenge for activists to advocate for uniform marriage rights. Navigating this complex legal landscape required extensive legal battles, lobbying efforts, and public awareness campaigns (Sinatra 15). Public opinion has also posed a challenge. While acceptance of LGBTQ rights has grown significantly, a portion of the population still holds prejudiced views against same-sex marriage. Overcoming these biases demanded consistent and compelling storytelling that humanized LGBTQ individuals and underscored the importance of love and commitment, regardless of gender. Activists worked tirelessly to share personal stories, dispel misconceptions, and foster empathy, all while navigating backlash from those resistant to change (Fisher 5). Additionally, the media landscape presented both opportunities and challenges. Coverage of LGBTQ issues has evolved, becoming more inclusive and sensitive. However, biased or negative portrayals still persisted, reinforcing stereotypes and stigmatization. Activists worked to challenge these narratives, encourage balanced reporting, and amplify positive stories that highlighted the joys and challenges faced by LGBTQ couples (Tsai 4). Balancing the need for visibility with concerns of privacy and safety also posed a delicate challenge, as some LGBTQ individuals feared backlash or discrimination.
Lastly, conservative political leaders like Donald Trump are also counted as among the challenges that this marriage equality journey has faced in the recent past. Election of president Trump in 2016 casted doubts on the smooth progression of marriage equality championing that was steadily taking shape in the previous Obama’s administration (Burrack 563). Most activists and LGBTQ community members felt that President Trump was coming to disrupt America’s commitment to SOGI human rights. A disruption of such commitment would be a drawback to the hard-earned achievement. Up to 2018, there was uncertainty regarding the United States of America’s position on promoting SOGI rights. This uncertainty hinder realization and enjoyment of the SOGI rights, hence is regarded as a major drawback in the history of community activism and political mobilization regarding marriage equality.
In conclusion, the above-discussed effects of both proposition 8 and Obama’s stance can be summarized as shown in the table below.
Table 1
The above table summarizes the effects of the two occurrences. It is a summary of the arguments made in the essay using information sourced from various scholarly literatures. Hence, the table is important as it gives the reader a quick glimpse of the whole argument made in the essay.
Works Cited
Bratica, Robyn B. “Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues in Schools: Advocacy, Researchs, and Global Perspectives: Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Schooling: The Nexus of Research, Practice, and Policy. Edited by Stephen T. Russell and Stacey S. Horn, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2017. 416 pp., $55.00 (Paperback). ISBN: 978–0–19-938,765-6.” (2018): 309-310.
Brena, Maria Claudia. “The Effects of Proposition 8 in the LGBT Rights Movement in Orange County.” e-Research: A Journal of Undergraduate Work 1.3 (2014): 3.
Burack, Cynthia. “Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) Human Rights Assistance in the Time of Trump.” Politics & Gender 14.4 (2018): 561-580.
Chase, Anthony Tirado. “Human rights contestations: sexual orientation and gender identity.” The International Journal of Human Rights 20.6 (2016): 703-723.
“Church Issues Statement on Proposition 8 Protest.” Newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org, 7 Nov. 2008, newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-issues-statement-on-proposition-8-protest.
Cohen, Andrew. “The 8 Biggest Lessons From Yesterday’s Prop 8 Ruling.” The Atlantic, 8 Feb. 2012.
Cummings, Scott L. “Rethinking the foundational critiques of lawyers in social movements.” Fordham L. Rev. 85 (2016): 1987.
Daigle, Megan, and Henri Myrttinen. “Bringing diverse sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) into peacebuilding policy and practice.” Gender & Development 26.1 (2018): 103-120.
Fisher, Shauna F. “Before the Wedding Dance: Citizen Policymaking on Same-Sex Marriage.” California Journal of Politics and Policy 9.3 (2017).
Flores, Andrew R. “Persuasion and ballot initiatives: how persuasive were the televised campaign ads on same-sex marriage?.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 7.1 (2019): 177-193.
Gallup. “LGBT Identification in U.S. Ticks Up to 7.1%.” Gallup.com, 17 Feb. 2022, news.gallup.com/poll/389792/lgbt-identification-ticks-up.aspx.
Hatzenbuehler, Mark L., et al. “Proposition 8 and homophobic bullying in California.” Pediatrics 143.6 (2019).
Kies, Addie V. “‘Til Proposition 8 Do Us Part: The Rise and Fall of Same-Sex Marriage in California.” Rich. JL & Pub. Int. 12 (2008): 265.
Lewis, Gregory B., and Charles W. Gossett. “Why did Californians pass Proposition 8? Stability and change in public support for same-sex marriage.” California Journal of Politics and Policy 3.1 (2011).
MacAskill, Ewen, and Adam Gabbatt. “Barack Obama Speaks out and Declares Support for Same-sex Marriage.” The Guardian, 9 May 2012, www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/09/barack-obama-supports-gay-marriage.
Mello, Joe. “The Right Stuff? Assessing the Use of Rights Discourse in Same-Sex Marriage Ballot Measure Campaigns.” Polity 51.4 (2019): 724-748.
Newport, Frank. “For first time, majority of Americans favor legal gay marriage.” Gallup Politics (2011).
Raphael, Steven. “The deterrent effects of California’s proposition 8: weighing the evidence.” Criminology & Public Policy 5.3 (2006): 471-478.
Salas, Richard. “In re Marriage Cases: The Fundamental Right to Marry and Equal Protection Under the California Constitution and the Effects of Proposition 8.” Hastings Const. LQ 36 (2008): 545.
Sinatra, Christine. “Political Controversies about marginalized groups increase bullying in youths.” UT News, 13 May 2019.
Tsai, Robert L. “Obama’s Conversion on Same-Sex Marriage: The Social Foundations of Individual Rights.” Conn. L. Rev. 50 (2018):
