[emo] "absorb and swallow what's being pushed"
Bandom has made a lot of people on my flist very happy. I'm all for the happy. I just wish that there were room to disagree without being accused of Cheerio-pissing.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this: Like whatever you like. Please, though, pause for a moment before dismissing others' offense and attacking those who are offended.
Or, you know, don't. But this post is for the latter.
Why might I be offended? This post depends on you accepting that queers are an oppressed and marginalized group in society -- as are people of color, women, the poor, et al. The histories and contemporary status of oppression for these groups differ in countless ways and degrees, but the *fact* of oppression is the same.
Okay, so that probably cleared the room.
These are some arguments I've seen made recently. Blackface is an offensive and inaccurate analogy.Actually, I'm glad for the term "stagegay", because it's far less inflammatory and a lot more informative. That said, I don't think the analogy is wholly inaccurate. I'm not ignorant; I *don't* think the histories of African-Americans and queers under dominant culture are at all similar in degree (of violence, hatred, and, frankly, evil). However, borrowing characteristics from an oppressed group and then profiting by performing those characteristics for a mainstream audience where -- by definition of "mainstream" -- the oppressed are not welcome sounds like blackface and stagegay to me. Perhaps other posters used the analogy differently; I *think* I can acknowledge that PoCs and queers are not the same while also acknowledging the analogy. I'm still glad for another term, however.
Stagegay encourages openmindedness!Absent some perfect sociological instrument for measuring concerts-as-consciousness-raising, I don't buy it. Faux-queer antics onstage entertain and scandalize and aid the bands in their commercial endeavors by building publicity and selling Hondas, &c.
Yes, all culture serves the capitalist structure. I just have to look at my comics longboxes to understand that. However, I -- one person, just an individual poster -- have found it useful to keep an eye on who profits. If you don't, if your priorities head somewhere else, that's your prerogative.
Queers should be happy for mainstream support!Uh, this isn't support. Nor am I drooling eagerly for society's approbation *anyway*.
If stagegay is offensive for using queerness for entertainment, then it's just like slash, you hypocrite!You know what? You might be right; the vast majority of slash sucks and, in my reading, exists to satisfy largely heteronormative ends -- by erasing female characters, focusing largely female-identified readers on male bodies, and fetishizing reinscribing the preeminent importance of male homosociality.
But. Slash and fanfic in general are (can be considered) products of creative interpretation; they're not passive reactions to onstage performance, but (in my utopia) active interventions.
I don't expect agreement here, nor do I judge the happiness many have found in their new fandom (in other words: saying that I'm offended is *not* the same thing as deeming you, random bandom fan, some soul-crushing homophobe. It's really not). I ask that I be allowed to judge the discourse emanating from that fandom and that, if it is offensive, I have a chance to say why I think so.
Another note: I'm really upset about all this. Commence laughing at me, because this *is* just the Internet, but also understand that if you do reply, I'm not looking for a zero-sum argument on this, just an enlargement of the discursive field. Secondly, it might take me some time to respond to you.
In much longer, but probably more entertaining form: My thoughts on emo, let me show you them.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this: Like whatever you like. Please, though, pause for a moment before dismissing others' offense and attacking those who are offended.
Or, you know, don't. But this post is for the latter.
Why might I be offended? This post depends on you accepting that queers are an oppressed and marginalized group in society -- as are people of color, women, the poor, et al. The histories and contemporary status of oppression for these groups differ in countless ways and degrees, but the *fact* of oppression is the same.
Okay, so that probably cleared the room.
These are some arguments I've seen made recently. Blackface is an offensive and inaccurate analogy.Actually, I'm glad for the term "stagegay", because it's far less inflammatory and a lot more informative. That said, I don't think the analogy is wholly inaccurate. I'm not ignorant; I *don't* think the histories of African-Americans and queers under dominant culture are at all similar in degree (of violence, hatred, and, frankly, evil). However, borrowing characteristics from an oppressed group and then profiting by performing those characteristics for a mainstream audience where -- by definition of "mainstream" -- the oppressed are not welcome sounds like blackface and stagegay to me. Perhaps other posters used the analogy differently; I *think* I can acknowledge that PoCs and queers are not the same while also acknowledging the analogy. I'm still glad for another term, however.
Stagegay encourages openmindedness!Absent some perfect sociological instrument for measuring concerts-as-consciousness-raising, I don't buy it. Faux-queer antics onstage entertain and scandalize and aid the bands in their commercial endeavors by building publicity and selling Hondas, &c.
Yes, all culture serves the capitalist structure. I just have to look at my comics longboxes to understand that. However, I -- one person, just an individual poster -- have found it useful to keep an eye on who profits. If you don't, if your priorities head somewhere else, that's your prerogative.
Queers should be happy for mainstream support!Uh, this isn't support. Nor am I drooling eagerly for society's approbation *anyway*.
If stagegay is offensive for using queerness for entertainment, then it's just like slash, you hypocrite!You know what? You might be right; the vast majority of slash sucks and, in my reading, exists to satisfy largely heteronormative ends -- by erasing female characters, focusing largely female-identified readers on male bodies, and fetishizing reinscribing the preeminent importance of male homosociality.
But. Slash and fanfic in general are (can be considered) products of creative interpretation; they're not passive reactions to onstage performance, but (in my utopia) active interventions.
I don't expect agreement here, nor do I judge the happiness many have found in their new fandom (in other words: saying that I'm offended is *not* the same thing as deeming you, random bandom fan, some soul-crushing homophobe. It's really not). I ask that I be allowed to judge the discourse emanating from that fandom and that, if it is offensive, I have a chance to say why I think so.
Another note: I'm really upset about all this. Commence laughing at me, because this *is* just the Internet, but also understand that if you do reply, I'm not looking for a zero-sum argument on this, just an enlargement of the discursive field. Secondly, it might take me some time to respond to you.
In much longer, but probably more entertaining form: My thoughts on emo, let me show you them.