Showing posts with label racism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label racism. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

No Fats, Femmes, Asians, or Oldies

Online dating/cruising is a minefield of snap judgments and highly specific standards that the gay community knows all too well. Maybe it's because there's not too many of us to begin with (as compared to our straight pals) and we flock to the net to find each other, or because dating websites are just so damn popular now... or maybe both of these reasons, but the world of online dating/cruising is not new to LGBT people. I remember when I was first coming out, the internet was such an amazing resource for talking to individuals who actually understood the issues I was going through. I have and always will have a special place in my heart for the web, as it is both a meeting point for like-minded individuals who have not been given a voice, a resource for education, and also a tool for social justice.

So there I was, talking to another gay guy about life... when he mentioned to me that he felt so amazingly old. He confided in me that not too many gay guys talked to him anymore because of his age. He was 25. He mentioned that he wants to find a LTR (long term relationship) before he turns 30, because at that point he will be considered dead in the gay community.

I was watching Another Gay Movie with some friends (pretty funny at parts, if you can get over the crazy stereotyping... it became such a staple in my apartment that we would watch it in conjuction with Mamma Mia  almost daily while doing homework and refer to our evening plans as experiencing 'Another Gay Mamma') when I noticed a movie gag about 4 guys going into a gay bar. They're asked how old they are by some bears to which one guy sweetly replies that he's only 17. The bears scoff and say that he's already peaked within the gay community, and leaves him to find younger guys.

Of course this movie gag is completely in jest, but it brings up an interesting piece of gay male culture: the rampant ageism. The man I was talking to online was not kidding when he told me that he felt like he was going to be considered dead when he reached the age of 30. He was perhaps making an exaggeration, but was picking up on a very real truth within the gay male community: youth is worshiped. This may sound no different from straight culture (given that bieber is being fetishized by women) but ageism is even more apparent within the gay male community.

In Darker Shades of Queer, Chong-suk Han discusses his experiences as a gay man of color, and how he has noticed blatant racism within queer circles in addition to homophobia in communities of color. He brings up the critical point that oppressed groups that would benefit from being empathetic to each other's causes (people of color and non-heterosexuals) often discriminate against each other in order to cling to the small piece of privilege that hate brings with it, leaving queer people of color to live in the borderlands of these groups, not necessarily feeling welcome in either. Think about it. In Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, The L Word, and Queer as Folk (which are unfortunately seen as the tantamount of gay experience) mainly feature upper middle class white people.

Author Jason Chang really hits the nail on the head when he discusses how Asian-American men in particular are seen as feminine and as undesirable sex partners (sexism/racism/heterosexism connection). This goes in concert with Chong-suk Han's argument, who agrees and goes on to discuss how Black and Hispanic men are seen as hyper-masculine and over-sexualized to the point of people viewing them as sex objects.

I was on a cruising website (probably not the kind of cruise you're thinking of) talking to this guy, when he responded by telling me that he wasn't interested in femmes. At the time, I had no idea what he meant by 'femme' other than that I was probably being associated with a woman. I probed him for more information (as I often do with strangers) and he told me that based on how I look/presented myself, I was too feminine for him. He told me that he is only looking for straight-acting (i.e. masculine) men. I thought to myself, "Okay, that's just one person's preference" and proceeded to look for other guys with less gender-representation-specific standards. I took me all of 1 minute to find another guy with a profile that said "No femmes"... and then another and another and another. I have never seen a dating/cruising profile or even heard of a gay man who is unattracted to 'straight-acting' men. 

All of these connected stories lead to my main idea: marginalization of these groups. Unfortunately it's all too common for gay men to proclaim they deem a combination (or perhaps all) of these groups unattractive. Many claim that their attraction is based on personal preference... and indeed it is... but (if you know me) you know that I like to look at how the big-picture/society shapes our individual experiences/actions/motivations/desires. To say that our desires are only internal and biological would be false, as it pays no homage to how culture and history shape our current situations/desires (and indeed they do). Of course biology does play a role in our sexual attractions, but so do social norms and cultural expectations. What individuals in one society may collectively deem attractive may not carry over to another time period, or even another culture. To say that men are only attracted to blonde haired and blue eyed women is an amazingly white-centered, hetero-normative idea that does not hold up when looking at sexual attraction across the world, throughout time, or among same-sex couples.

 That being said, in gay male culture in United States, there are some cultural moors that dictate who is and isn't attractive. These ideals that white, trim, masculine men are the most attractive are, I believe, a potent mix of sexism, racism, and internalized hetero-sexism. Actually, it's not just here, and not just with gay men.

This is not to say that all people are racist (white people tend to freak out when I use the word 'racism', so I try to explain myself extra carefully so as to make them less defensive and more likely to listen), but it is to say that our snap judgments we make about who is and is not attractive are influenced in part from several cultural ideals that place specific individuals (who have historically held the most societal power) at the pinnacle of attraction. Is it a coincidence that gay males tend to view feminine men as less attractive, when we live in a society that grants more social, cultural, and economic power to men? I think not.

It could be said that my argument is simply me lamenting from not being labeled at the most attractive, but I ask you to do your own research. Go onto gay male dating/cruising websites and take a look. Hell, go onto craigslist. See for yourself. Tell me what you find.


P.S. The female cast of the L Word is actually made of entirely heterosexual women... because apparently straight women are better at being lesbians than... lesbians. Really makes you think about how 'gayness' marketed on TV is actually quite different from the everyday experiences of queer people.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

The Straight Agenda


Consider this statement:

I hate it when straight people are all in-your-face about their sexuality.

It sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? Ask yourself why and you'll find the answer is because it is never stated... but it's reversal is incredibly common in mainstream [i.e. straight] speech.

Why is this? Why do you always hear corporate media discuss the ills of gays forcing their 'agenda' onto unsuspecting innocent children (who journalists often assume are all straight), but you never hear any news source discuss the ills of the 'heterosexual agenda'?

One could argue that efforts to limit the rights and legal protections of LGBT U.S.ians are part of the 'sinful' members of the heterosexual agenda. I'm not arguing that there is any heterosexual agenda, but that the very argument that creating safe spaces for LGBT individuals in the workplace is part of some vast conspiracy to limit the rights of heterosexuals is inherently flawed. Given that LGBT U.S.ians are awarded less civil liberties and protections than heterosexuals (when it is perfectly legal to fire someone because of their sexual orientation in 29 states, and/or because of their gender identity or expression in 38 states), these basic rights are not "special". Straight people are not fired from their jobs for being straight, as straight is seen as the default, or norm in this country. Many people even fail to remember that heterosexuality is itself a sexual orientation, just as so many fail to recognize Caucasian as a race (think about how white people are often baffled at the concept of white culture).

In this country (and in many other industrialized western nations) when we mention learning about race, so many of us immediately think of non-white people. When we mention learning about gender, so many of us immediately think about women. When we mention learning about sexual orientation, so many of us immediately think of gay men (lesbians, bisexuals, and other sexualities considered "deviant" are often forgotten about in addition to heterosexuals).

Heterosexual privilege #7: My sexual orientation is unconsciously and consciously considered the default sexual orientation.

As an example of not being part of the "default", let us consider the skin color phenomenon in this country, where anything "skin colored" or "nude colored" is automatically assumed to be the color of white people's skin. Anyone remember this dress that Michelle Obama wore? Fashion critics (and even the dress's designer) referred to the dress as "nude" colored... when it is obviously not the color of Michelle Obama's skin.

Here's an excellent link that points to maleness as being frequently considered the default of sex in the U.S.

And finally, the piece de resistance, Republicans (or gay oppression party, w'evs) accused Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor of being "biased" in her judicial decisions during her confirmation hearings... not realizing that they assumed white men are racially neutral in all judicial decisions. Oops!

How convenient when people who claim we live in a post-racial society (i.e. arguing "We're all color-blind") actually mean that only white people live in a post-racial society... because, you know, whiteness isn't a race, natch! (please note my excessive sarcasm).

Anywayz, back to my gay agenda. If I were an African American marching with Dr. King, would you say I had a black agenda? If I were a woman working with Elizabeth Cady Stanton fighting for Women's Suffrage, would you accuse me of having a women's agenda? If I were disabled and working with Edward Roberts to ensure that federal organizations cannot fire someone solely because of their handicap, would you say I had a disabled agenda?  If you would, then I would be proud to be part of all of these agendas (and more).

To say that Frederick Douglass wanted to limit the rights of white people or that Betty Freidan wanted to limit the rights of men (which some people still think) is absolutely false. They wanted equality for all people regardless of identity status, not just who the religious right happens to like (i.e. wealthy straight christian men... yes, the religious right hurts women).

Okay, time for me to go spread the gay gospel by converting innocent straight children into devious little gays who support heavily taxing the wealthy with my homo-socialist-witchcraft-powers. Muahahahahahahaha.

p.s. Albus Dumbledore was gay, and no one ever complained about him implementing the gay agenda!! Or maybe that's why Hufflepuff was formed... to act as a gay and lesbian task force at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry... This is obviously the most critical piece to my argument.

-Harvey Milk Jr.