but beyond that, no holds barred. feel free to use your legal privileges as a straight person to launch yourself into reality tv mediocrity. its the american dream.
CBS has just announced their newest reality show, "Arranged Marriage." in the show, four couples, chosen for one another by their families, will actually legally get married and the show will follow those marriages and see how they turn out. what i'm getting out of this? letting gay people get married would pretty much destroy the fabric of our society, cheapen our family values, and bring about the End of Days with some dramatic rains of fire. but straight people should feel free to use marriage as a publicity stunt, a joke, a fun activity in vegas (don't worry, you can always just cancel it when you sober up!) and whatever the f*ck else they want. sounds about right. as long as the people involved are of opposite genders, its a positive addition to American culture, and jesus will in no way be upset. score one more point for reason and rationality.
Showing posts with label homophobia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label homophobia. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
the gays, the blacks, and other random thoughts
all right...i've had a bit of writers block, but it doesn't seem to be going away so i'm just gonna push on through.
the subject of this post was originally going to be proposition 8, but i feel compelled to make a detour before i even begin: i recently went to see Milk, and i need to give it a quick shout-out. the movie was amazing, sean penn was amazing, and it was so incredibly relevant as to appear almost heavy-handed. but of course, when they were making the movie they couldn't have known Prop 8 would pass. which really makes you think, doesn't it. Just a brief background for those who haven't yet seen it, Milk is the story of the life and death of Harvey Milk, San Francisco Supervisor and the first openly gay public official. A large part of the movie focuses on the fight against proposition 6 in california: a proposition which would have banned gay people from teaching in california schools. watching the celebrations in the movie as prop 6 is defeated against the odds is a pretty grim juxtaposition to our current time. you can't help but think we may be sliding backwards. if, during a time when an openly gay public official lived every day knowing his life was in danger, they could defeat prop 6 but today we couldn't seem to defeat prop 8, what does that say about the direction our country is headed?
i don't actually think, though, that we're sliding so far backwards. prop 8 was a pretty horrendous setback, but i do believe its only a matter of time before gay people have the right to marry and this whole mess is a thing of the past. until then, though, just a couple of thoughts on the whole prop 8 thing:
1) I saw Sean Penn interviewed on Charlie Rose about Milk and various other things, and just wanted to paste a quote that I thought was particularly compelling, and also more eloquent than we've come to expect from our television sets. When asked about prop 8, Penn said,
2) there has been a LOT of talk about the role of black people in passing prop 8, and it just seems like its time for someone not-crazy to weigh in. people have blamed obama for not supporting gay marriage. rightly so. he really did not come through in any way shape or form on that issue. Sure, he opposed prop 8, but as a writer for Salon pointed out, "not so loud that anyone can hear him."
even so, there seems to be this sense that black people, rushing to the polls to vote for obama, tipped the balance towards prop 8. while that theory has since been disproven (it would have passed with or without black help), the fact does remain that 70% of black people surveyed voted in favor of prop 8. thats a lot. but i'm not completely sure why everyone was so d*mn surprised. homophobia in the black community is not a new issue, but everyone seemed to be trying to make it a new issue, to the detriment of logic. example: Charles M. Blow, "visual columnist" for the New York times, and currently trying his hardest to knock bill kristol from his current position as 'kaya's least favorite columnist,' wrote this piece in which he seems to imply that its not homophobia that's the problem. in fact, its not even all black people. no, black WOMEN are the problem because they're so scared of being alone forever that they have to lash out at gays for decreasing the pool of potential mates. um, what? wrong. illogical. also pretty damn sexist. i give that twenty-five fails for charles m. blow.
this type of logic-stretching seems to really be going around, though. so the black community is homophobic. everyone is trying to focus in on one issue that makes it so: maybe its the 'down-low' phenomenon (boo, hiss). maybe its that black women just can't find a man (hiss, boo). maybe it's the church (hmm...). but at the end of the day all of these arguments fail because they're trying to simplify a complex problem into a sound byte. sure, many churches have played a role in the pervasive homophobia in this country (i'm looking at you, mormons). but other churches (what up, episcopalians!) have made serious progress in fighting homophobia. just like white people, black people don't all belong to the same church. "the church" is not the problem. but i guess its not that quotable to say homophobia in the black community is influenced by homophobia in certain religious communities, homophobia in mainstream hip-hop which is, of course, encouraged by wealthy white funders, and a complex history of desexualization and hypersexualization tracing roots back to slavery that creates a lot of baggage around black sexuality and gender identity, among other things. and of course, nowhere in any of these discussions has it even come up that 'black' and 'gay' are not mutually exclusive categories. hm. i know we all want to make our point quickly and get published, but its possible certain issues would result in more productive conversation if we actually engaged with the complexity of the issue at hand rather than trying to fit it into a cute and simple box.
more on this later. i think i'm significantly late to work. i'll just leave you with this:
3) just for your enjoyment:
the subject of this post was originally going to be proposition 8, but i feel compelled to make a detour before i even begin: i recently went to see Milk, and i need to give it a quick shout-out. the movie was amazing, sean penn was amazing, and it was so incredibly relevant as to appear almost heavy-handed. but of course, when they were making the movie they couldn't have known Prop 8 would pass. which really makes you think, doesn't it. Just a brief background for those who haven't yet seen it, Milk is the story of the life and death of Harvey Milk, San Francisco Supervisor and the first openly gay public official. A large part of the movie focuses on the fight against proposition 6 in california: a proposition which would have banned gay people from teaching in california schools. watching the celebrations in the movie as prop 6 is defeated against the odds is a pretty grim juxtaposition to our current time. you can't help but think we may be sliding backwards. if, during a time when an openly gay public official lived every day knowing his life was in danger, they could defeat prop 6 but today we couldn't seem to defeat prop 8, what does that say about the direction our country is headed?
i don't actually think, though, that we're sliding so far backwards. prop 8 was a pretty horrendous setback, but i do believe its only a matter of time before gay people have the right to marry and this whole mess is a thing of the past. until then, though, just a couple of thoughts on the whole prop 8 thing:
1) I saw Sean Penn interviewed on Charlie Rose about Milk and various other things, and just wanted to paste a quote that I thought was particularly compelling, and also more eloquent than we've come to expect from our television sets. When asked about prop 8, Penn said,
"When they talk about it, its just a word, and ‘why not leave the traditionalists to their word?’ Well, you know, there’s 13 year old kids still today hanging themselves because the reach to identity is still too far, because they’re homosexual, or whatever the issue is….and we can’t give up a word? To save that kid’s life? It’s a national shame"aw. Sean Penn.
2) there has been a LOT of talk about the role of black people in passing prop 8, and it just seems like its time for someone not-crazy to weigh in. people have blamed obama for not supporting gay marriage. rightly so. he really did not come through in any way shape or form on that issue. Sure, he opposed prop 8, but as a writer for Salon pointed out, "not so loud that anyone can hear him."
even so, there seems to be this sense that black people, rushing to the polls to vote for obama, tipped the balance towards prop 8. while that theory has since been disproven (it would have passed with or without black help), the fact does remain that 70% of black people surveyed voted in favor of prop 8. thats a lot. but i'm not completely sure why everyone was so d*mn surprised. homophobia in the black community is not a new issue, but everyone seemed to be trying to make it a new issue, to the detriment of logic. example: Charles M. Blow, "visual columnist" for the New York times, and currently trying his hardest to knock bill kristol from his current position as 'kaya's least favorite columnist,' wrote this piece in which he seems to imply that its not homophobia that's the problem. in fact, its not even all black people. no, black WOMEN are the problem because they're so scared of being alone forever that they have to lash out at gays for decreasing the pool of potential mates. um, what? wrong. illogical. also pretty damn sexist. i give that twenty-five fails for charles m. blow.
this type of logic-stretching seems to really be going around, though. so the black community is homophobic. everyone is trying to focus in on one issue that makes it so: maybe its the 'down-low' phenomenon (boo, hiss). maybe its that black women just can't find a man (hiss, boo). maybe it's the church (hmm...). but at the end of the day all of these arguments fail because they're trying to simplify a complex problem into a sound byte. sure, many churches have played a role in the pervasive homophobia in this country (i'm looking at you, mormons). but other churches (what up, episcopalians!) have made serious progress in fighting homophobia. just like white people, black people don't all belong to the same church. "the church" is not the problem. but i guess its not that quotable to say homophobia in the black community is influenced by homophobia in certain religious communities, homophobia in mainstream hip-hop which is, of course, encouraged by wealthy white funders, and a complex history of desexualization and hypersexualization tracing roots back to slavery that creates a lot of baggage around black sexuality and gender identity, among other things. and of course, nowhere in any of these discussions has it even come up that 'black' and 'gay' are not mutually exclusive categories. hm. i know we all want to make our point quickly and get published, but its possible certain issues would result in more productive conversation if we actually engaged with the complexity of the issue at hand rather than trying to fit it into a cute and simple box.
more on this later. i think i'm significantly late to work. i'll just leave you with this:
3) just for your enjoyment:
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
the watchful eyes of others
This post will be kind of a new direction for me I think, because in general I have way more fun talking shit about other people and why they suck than like, self-reflecting. But what can I say, I’m in a kind of self-reflective mood. and I suddenly realized, after reading a very good blog post last night, that I have a thought other people might actually be interested in hearing.
So first-off, the blog post that inspired this ramble: its called “take my arm, my love,” and is more or less just about what it feels like to be gay in public – to constantly be aware of yourself and to be constantly aware of everyone who can see you in a way that straight people don’t need to be. The author talks about PDA specifically – how she always takes her girlfriend’s arm rather than her hand so that the action could potentially be read as nothing more than friendship, how she “stops, looks, and listens” before doing anything that might give them away as a couple. I’ve been especially aware of this recently because in new york you can’t help but always be in other people’s business, and things like the morning subway ride turn into daily reflections on how much straight people take for granted. I don’t think a morning has gone by in quite some time when I haven’t been on the train near a straight couple riding to work together. They cuddle, they kiss, they stare deep into each others eyes, they hold hands, and I always find myself being excessively repulsed by the whole affair. Which maybe is just because I’m not a huge fan of PDA, but I think more to the point, and what this other blog post was trying to get at, those are all things that I would in no way feel comfortable doing on the train. even little things like the kind of eye contact you make with someone you're dating, or how close you sit next to them on the train are things i'm constantly aware of. Not to say that I wouldn’t do any of those things mentioned above, but just to say that if I did, it would be a conscious, rebellious action – it wouldn’t be about just being madly in love and lost in the glorious wonderland of each other’s company or any bullshit like that, it would be about trying to prove I wasn’t scared of anyone else on that train. Which is kind of fucked up.
This past weekend I went to a friend’s wedding, and was sort of shocked by how many different emotions it made me feel. As some of you may know, I’m not a huge fan of “feelings,” so needless to say it was unsettling. The wedding was beautiful, and everyone was super-happy, and it was just all-around pretty great, but I found myself getting sort of sad at various points, which is weird because I have literally never wanted to get married – not that I actively don’t want to, I just never really thought about it as a kid, and then recently just sort of assumed I wouldn’t. it hasn’t ever been that important to me, but seeing how happy everyone was, how happy the bride and groom’s families were, etc. etc. made me all of a sudden super self-reflective because I was like, “oh dang.” It’s a pretty big deal to be able to get that kind of affirmation from your family and friends. And I don’t think its “necessary,” per se, but having the option is probably a nice feeling, huh?
But actually maybe “nice” is the wrong word. As teh portly dyke points out in her blog post, most straight couples (or single straight people for that matter) would have a horrible time trying to live for even a few days being as conscious of their every move as I usually am. But frankly I’m not jealous of that. I’m MAD about that because I’m just in general irritated by people who are not conscious of their surroundings or their place within those surroundings, but I don’t want that. Sure I want the safety that comes with being straight, or being white, or being a man in a racist, sexist, homophobic society, but thank god I’m not any of those things. And I think not being any of those things has forced me into this kind of hyper-awareness of my surroundings that I really appreciate. Its just not every day that I stop to realize how many people in the world, or even just in my subway car, don’t need to and don’t want to be conscious of the watchful eyes of others.
moral of the story, i guess, is that yes i will hold my girlfriend's hand in public, but no i won't feel completely comfortable (read: safe) doing so. but at the end of the day, i'm cool with that, because the discomfort means that i'm making a conscious choice, and it means i care enough about her and about myself to make that choice. which is a good thing.
So first-off, the blog post that inspired this ramble: its called “take my arm, my love,” and is more or less just about what it feels like to be gay in public – to constantly be aware of yourself and to be constantly aware of everyone who can see you in a way that straight people don’t need to be. The author talks about PDA specifically – how she always takes her girlfriend’s arm rather than her hand so that the action could potentially be read as nothing more than friendship, how she “stops, looks, and listens” before doing anything that might give them away as a couple. I’ve been especially aware of this recently because in new york you can’t help but always be in other people’s business, and things like the morning subway ride turn into daily reflections on how much straight people take for granted. I don’t think a morning has gone by in quite some time when I haven’t been on the train near a straight couple riding to work together. They cuddle, they kiss, they stare deep into each others eyes, they hold hands, and I always find myself being excessively repulsed by the whole affair. Which maybe is just because I’m not a huge fan of PDA, but I think more to the point, and what this other blog post was trying to get at, those are all things that I would in no way feel comfortable doing on the train. even little things like the kind of eye contact you make with someone you're dating, or how close you sit next to them on the train are things i'm constantly aware of. Not to say that I wouldn’t do any of those things mentioned above, but just to say that if I did, it would be a conscious, rebellious action – it wouldn’t be about just being madly in love and lost in the glorious wonderland of each other’s company or any bullshit like that, it would be about trying to prove I wasn’t scared of anyone else on that train. Which is kind of fucked up.
This past weekend I went to a friend’s wedding, and was sort of shocked by how many different emotions it made me feel. As some of you may know, I’m not a huge fan of “feelings,” so needless to say it was unsettling. The wedding was beautiful, and everyone was super-happy, and it was just all-around pretty great, but I found myself getting sort of sad at various points, which is weird because I have literally never wanted to get married – not that I actively don’t want to, I just never really thought about it as a kid, and then recently just sort of assumed I wouldn’t. it hasn’t ever been that important to me, but seeing how happy everyone was, how happy the bride and groom’s families were, etc. etc. made me all of a sudden super self-reflective because I was like, “oh dang.” It’s a pretty big deal to be able to get that kind of affirmation from your family and friends. And I don’t think its “necessary,” per se, but having the option is probably a nice feeling, huh?
But actually maybe “nice” is the wrong word. As teh portly dyke points out in her blog post, most straight couples (or single straight people for that matter) would have a horrible time trying to live for even a few days being as conscious of their every move as I usually am. But frankly I’m not jealous of that. I’m MAD about that because I’m just in general irritated by people who are not conscious of their surroundings or their place within those surroundings, but I don’t want that. Sure I want the safety that comes with being straight, or being white, or being a man in a racist, sexist, homophobic society, but thank god I’m not any of those things. And I think not being any of those things has forced me into this kind of hyper-awareness of my surroundings that I really appreciate. Its just not every day that I stop to realize how many people in the world, or even just in my subway car, don’t need to and don’t want to be conscious of the watchful eyes of others.
moral of the story, i guess, is that yes i will hold my girlfriend's hand in public, but no i won't feel completely comfortable (read: safe) doing so. but at the end of the day, i'm cool with that, because the discomfort means that i'm making a conscious choice, and it means i care enough about her and about myself to make that choice. which is a good thing.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
bye bye barack
you know, i wasn't even gonna post on this mainly because i'm lazy, but a recent trip to the comments section over on the field negro's post inspired me to have my (belated) say.
so you (hopefully) have heard already: Barack Obama fucked up big-time and booked "ex-gay" Donnie McClurkin to share the stage with him on his gospel tour. Needless to say, the gays got upset. among some of McClurkin's more memorable statements have been equating homosexuality to lying (its wrong, but some people just like to do it), and announcing a war between the gays, and the rest of "normal" america. i don't really want to go into the whole thing, so for your convenience i'll just go ahead and link to all the articles on this story over at pam's house blend. read from the bottom.
anyways, i have SEVERAL beefs i really just need to air and be done with it. so it's time for a good old-fashioned number-the-rage:
1. Obama: what the fuck? i mean i know you're not even that cool, and i never liked your face anyways, but this is a low even for mr "let's build a wall to keep the mexicans out." i mean not only did he book the guy, but when there was an outrage, he chose to stand by donnie "i used to be gay and now i'm not because its sinful, please don't interview my lover and blog about it because that would be awkward for me" mcclurkin.
did he expect NOT to lose the gay vote? and does he think he doesn't NEED the gay vote? like aside from being a shitty thing to do, it just seems straight up dumb. the amount of votes he might have gained by having a gospel tour cannot possibly be close to the amount he just lost for this fiasco. whoops.
2. Donnie: also what the fuck? first of all, don't embarrass yourself. you're claiming that you "quit the homosexual lifestyle" circa 2002, yet i just read an interview with a dude who claims to have been sharing your bed from 2001-2004? it just doesn't quite add up. also, i don't like you.
3. EVERYONE ON THE INTERNET: just shut the fuck up, really. i know, i know. don't read the comments on blogs, dont' read the comments on youtube. it will only make you mad. but guess what? i read them. and i'm mad. over on field negro's post, the conversation about obama and mcclurkin quickly did a downward spiral into various people arguing over whether homosexuality is a choice or not, whether boys who play with dolls are gay, how if gayness grosses you out that doesn't make you a homophobe, and of course how most lesbians are totally still attracted to men.
come. on. if you don't know what you're talking about, there's no need to write an essay about it and post it on the internet. just think what the internet would be like if before hitting "post comment" people stopped and said to themselves "i wonder if what i just wrote has any value at all?" and possibly "i wonder if anything in my life has made me knowledgeable on this subject, or whether i'm just talking out of my ass." ugh.
bottom line: if you're homophobic, and apparently most black people still are, maybe there's nothing i can do about that. but don't go bitching all over the internet that we shouldn't be so hard on obama. he, much like yourself, lost my respect a while back. i know black people continue to hold on to him and defend all the stupid-ass shit he does, but this is my announcement: i'm officially over it. obama sucks, and frankly i doubt he'll ever get a chance to prove that. but if by some miracle he does, don't say i didn't tell you so in 2009 when the supreme court cuts down roe v wade and affirmative action in one fell swoop, and obama shrugs his shoulders and goes back to building his wall.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
a smidgen of gayness
Well more like a smidgen of a post (yeah, I know, I'm slackin' on my updates, but at least Kaya's rockin' it out around these i-parts). Anyway, for those of you who know.. and I guess also for those of you who don't- my hometown is in the great ole state of Ohio (an obligatory "go Bucks!" has to be inserted here) and I'm currently visiting to see family and take care of some things, like doctor's visits since recent grads who haven't started work yet don't really have health coverage. Anyway, as I was at the doctor filling out my new-patient paperwork, I came across some questions, a choice sampling of which is below:
Just sayin.'
Do you have HIV/AIDS?...Word? I wasn't aware that homosexuality was a scientifically proven risk factor for contracting HIV, I thought unprotected sex (which conveniently not mentioned in their list) was a little more risky. Additionally, this seemed to be a highly Lutheran practice, which was awkward for any promiscuous gays that might need medical care.
Do you have HIV/AIDS high-risk behaviors such as homosexuality, heterosexuality with multiple sex partners, shared IV/drug usage?
Just sayin.'
Thursday, May 17, 2007
is Bobby Brown on crack? or are we all?
as i was wandering around the internet this morning (surprisingly enough, thousands of people are not trying to check out books on zoology today, so i have some free time on my hands at work), i discovered an interesting fact. apparently today is international day against homophobia. who knew? definitely not me. but now that i DO know, it seems like as appropriate a time as any to share some reflections on homophobia in the black community.
obviously this is something we'll have a lot more to say about as this blog continues, but to start us off, i wanted to share an email i got the other day that disturbed me. it was sent out over the ABHW list, and it was a clip of bobby brown being crazy on that 24 hours british show where apparently they lock you in a room with the host, Jamie Campbell, for 24 hours. i'm not completely "sure" how to put the video in here, and brittany is not awake yet for me to ask, so if this doesn't work out, sorry in advance. but here's the clip:
obviously this is something we'll have a lot more to say about as this blog continues, but to start us off, i wanted to share an email i got the other day that disturbed me. it was sent out over the ABHW list, and it was a clip of bobby brown being crazy on that 24 hours british show where apparently they lock you in a room with the host, Jamie Campbell, for 24 hours. i'm not completely "sure" how to put the video in here, and brittany is not awake yet for me to ask, so if this doesn't work out, sorry in advance. but here's the clip:
the full transcript, which i may or may not quote from depending on how i feel towards the end of this post, is available on towleroad.
anyways, aside from the fact that bobby brown is completely insane, here's what really bothered me about this:
people seem to find it hilarious. yeah its kiiinda funny how crazy he is, but when i watched this mainly i was horrified/frightened. i mean first off, jokes about prison rape aren't funny to begin with, so Campbell probably shoulda got slapped in the face once for that, but second of all, threatening to fuck another man up because you think he might possibly be gay is like, not really funny at all either. when i got this email, i expected people to reply being like, "dear lord he's crazy," but instead i got amusement. then i made the mistake of looking at some of the comments posted on youtube and on concrete loop. bad idea. the things people were saying were ridiculous. two themes in particular really rubbed me the wrong way.
1. about one million variations of "he must be hiding something." oh ok, so the problem here is not that bobby brown is wildly homophobic and advocating violence against gay people, the problem is that he must secretly be gay and that's funny because it makes him less of a man. great. way to take away a positive message.
2. another million variations of "i would have done that too" or "he did the right thing." the fact that so many people (and on concrete loop that usually translates to a lot of black people) think that the way he acted is in any way acceptable is horrifying to me.
so i mean, we'll talk about this more later i'm sure, but what i'm trying to say is basically what the fuck is wrong with the black community that anyone (albeit one of the craziest ones) would think it was ok to act that way on television, and that he could say something like this and be greeted with amusement rather than horror? it seems like for the amount of time we spend talking about the problems with portrayals of black male masculinity, we aren't trying very hard to change.
anyways, aside from the fact that bobby brown is completely insane, here's what really bothered me about this:
people seem to find it hilarious. yeah its kiiinda funny how crazy he is, but when i watched this mainly i was horrified/frightened. i mean first off, jokes about prison rape aren't funny to begin with, so Campbell probably shoulda got slapped in the face once for that, but second of all, threatening to fuck another man up because you think he might possibly be gay is like, not really funny at all either. when i got this email, i expected people to reply being like, "dear lord he's crazy," but instead i got amusement. then i made the mistake of looking at some of the comments posted on youtube and on concrete loop. bad idea. the things people were saying were ridiculous. two themes in particular really rubbed me the wrong way.
1. about one million variations of "he must be hiding something." oh ok, so the problem here is not that bobby brown is wildly homophobic and advocating violence against gay people, the problem is that he must secretly be gay and that's funny because it makes him less of a man. great. way to take away a positive message.
2. another million variations of "i would have done that too" or "he did the right thing." the fact that so many people (and on concrete loop that usually translates to a lot of black people) think that the way he acted is in any way acceptable is horrifying to me.
so i mean, we'll talk about this more later i'm sure, but what i'm trying to say is basically what the fuck is wrong with the black community that anyone (albeit one of the craziest ones) would think it was ok to act that way on television, and that he could say something like this and be greeted with amusement rather than horror? it seems like for the amount of time we spend talking about the problems with portrayals of black male masculinity, we aren't trying very hard to change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
