The need to call out homophobia

[sparkindarkness]

One of the many many things about homophobia that make me rage is how readily tolerated it is - and how ready people are to excuse it, defend it and deny it.

It saddens me that I need to repeat this  - but, if you think gay people are worth less than straight people, if you think we deserve less than straight people, if you think we don’t have the

Comments

[beauty_forashes]

Stop dancing for fear you may offend the bigots.

I heartily agree with you, however from conversations with straight allies, I get the impression that many of them are dancing for fear they may offend us, if they don't weigh every word with a feather and step on egg shells, and end up unintentionally saying a single thing that could possibly be construed as homophobic when it is not. Case in point: a friend of mine recently raised a point on LJ, one that I happened to agree with. She was immediately chastised in the most rude and over-the-top way by a person accusing her of being "trans-phobic", because, if you took a mental detour around several corners, one part of her statement could be construed to be such. Heaven forbid! Yes, I am against homophobia, but where do we draw the line so that we don't end up being opponents to our own allies, and keep the scales from tipping into the raging waters of blind fanaticism? I'm not referring to you, but I've seen friends silenced and discouraged from attempting any sort of exchange with a

[beauty_forashes]

I fail to see how that example is "case in point," being that you did not articulate what your friend said and it could have very well been transphobic.

Look: In my mind, any good ally understands that being called out on misconceptions is a thousand times LESS difficult than living in a world where lots of people hate you. A good ally would, in the situation you mention, think: "Hmm, this person is ANGRY, perhaps there is a reason for his or her anger. Perhaps this person is expressing it online because he or she fears to express it in life and it triggered something. Hmm maybe I should shut up and THINK about this person's anger a bit." A real ally doesn't become an ally to get stickers and cookies. Anyone really committed to ending an "ism" that doesn't hold that marginalization EXPECTS to be called the fuck out on their shit A LOT.

-Leah

[beauty_forashes]

I fail to see how that example is "case in point," being that you did not articulate what your friend said and it could have very well been transphobic.

I didn't, because it's not my business to repeat comments others have left elsewhere on LJ. If she wants it posted here, that's up to her. I would be overstepping a bounds if I did that.

In my mind, any good ally understands that being called out on misconceptions is a thousand times LESS difficult than living in a world where lots of people hate you.True, but that's no reason to be hateful and rude to a person who honestly means no offense. Then you're not coming across as a good representative of the GLBT community, you're just coming across as hateful and rude. Period. People are more apt to listen to us if we maintanin some level of respect and common decency, and don't vent the same disrespect at them we complain about getting from homophobes. This encourages the exchange we're looking for. Rudeness and hatefulness where it's uncalled for does not, and it's not our right to

[sparkindarkness]

Well there are some major points on this. First of all - anyone doing the above mentioned (trating GBLT people as less for whatever reason, making sweeping statements, stereotyping etc), frankly doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.

I've always said there is a difference between ignorance and willful ignorance. And the things I've mentioned? I'd put them waaaaay on the side of willfull ignorance.

Now as to the slips and errors and missteps that any privileged person may make - because privileged DOES mean ignorant and even an ally who has made an effort to educate themselves (and that is step one of being an ally, so if they make a mistake that they could have avoided with basic 101 training, weeeelll again, benefit of the doubt is pretty thin on the ground there) will occasionally stick foot in mouth.

Now, ideally the ally will have a sufficient reputation and history that the people they have just trodden all over will give them the benefit of the doube. Sometimes that won't be the case. And, as I've said before sometimes a

[beauty_forashes]

I've always said there is a difference between ignorance and willful ignorance.Precisely my point, and I'm not talking about willful ignorance. I get where you're coming from, I agree sometimes anger is called for, I agree none of us are saints, and I know full well my temper has blown too at times. However, I think when it was uncalled-for in response to some subjective detail the other person *could not have known* beforehand, I owe them an apology, and not vice-versa. It's not fair, IMO, to make someone who simply doesn't know responsible for damage inflicted by those who really are willfully ignorant, and thereby make excuses for my own rudeness and inappropriate behavior - that's just childish. Fact is, people are being intimidated and silenced who (IMO) should not be, and that's a sad thing. And fact is, if I'm behaving like an ass, then people who would have stopped to understand me won't be willing to listen anymore, and some of them will end up hating me. But they won't hate me because I'm queer, they'll hate me because I'm

[citrinesunset]

Obviously, I don't know what happened with your friend, so I can't comment on that, exactly.

But it's hard for me to feel much sympathy for people who get "scared off" by one or two bad encounters or some idea they've gotten about what x group is like. Are there people who are genuinely trying but get scared? I'm sure there are, and I'm not doubting you on that. But in my experience, I've seen things like you describe used as an excuse to be prejudiced. I see that a lot in discussions about feminism, for example. Someone claims they met a woman once who called herself a feminist and did nothing but talk about how all men everywhere are evil, so therefore all feminists hate men.

So, I don't really like the idea that we're obligated to make up for the people who leave a bad impression (even if those people are lacking in sense). I think we should make a good example, certainly, but not by taking responsibility for people's biases.

[beauty_forashes]

I see what you mean, but - really - there isn't always a bias, and I don't think it's good to always be on the lookout, paranoid there might be one. If that's not making a sweeping statement, I don't know what is, and if that's not being biased myself, I don't know what is. And yes, I realize one of the linked articles insinuates that I'm supporting the homophobes if I think that way, even though I'm queer myself, and insinuates I'm justified in assuming the entirety of the straight world is out to get me, and treating them accordingly. But I don't think that's a healthy or balanced view of reality, so I don't buy into that kind of reactionary thinking. Um, actually I rather would take responsibility for the damage some of us have done and try to correct it, rather than rip someone's head off and then point fingers at them because they have no head. If I don't make that effort, who will?

[citrinesunset]

But I don't think it really matters if there's a bias there or not. If I'm conducting myself in a good manner, then it's not really my fault if someone else isn't. And I think the number of queer people who feel that all straight people are out to get them is probably a very small minority, and most people are not going to agree with that extreme of a view. In any group, there are going to be some people with really extreme or weird ideas that don't necessarily make sense, and I think people can disagree with them without writing off the larger community.

And in my experience, people who are really homophobic don't look at this the same way you or I would. For instance, I've been told that I was attacking someone merely because I wanted to be able to get legally married. So someone who really is homophobic is not necessarily going to see a difference between a vile attack and a calm argument or the fact that we exist.

[beauty_forashes]

Hmm, I think we see things similarly and there's the possibility of a misunderstanding because I wasn't all that clear on the incident I was referring to. It's always dicey to talk about others in public comments, that's why I was a little nebulous.

If I'm conducting myself in a good manner, then it's not really my fault if someone else isn't.

That's true. The incident I was talking about, however, was one where a straight friend was attacked in a rude, distainful and tasteless way, for a comment she made, a comment that was not meant to malign or hurt any member of the GLBT community. In fact, GLBT wasn't even the issue she addressed, the issue was trust, and I agree with the point she made. Another person chose to sniff out a bias in her statement and responded in a way that was completely inappropriate and over the top. I admit I wouldn't have stayed calm and diplomatic the way my friend did, if someone had responded to me that way, I would have verbally clobbered them, GLBT or not, because that was just uncalled for. Later, my

[sparkindarkness]

See, there are arseholes everywhere. If, say, a woman came to me and went over the top in rage and anger because of something I found completely unwarrented - I wouldn't then decide "I am leery about approaching, speaking to etc women from now on"

There are arseholes everywhere - but because we have a bad experience with one, two or even a dozen areseholes doesn't mean we should then be leery of an entire movement or community on the basis of one person.

It sounds awfully... privileged to decide "they don't need me" and avoid GBLTs because someone has reacted excessively due to hurt

[beauty_forashes]

It sounds awfully... privileged to decide "they don't need me" and avoid GBLTs because someone has reacted excessively due to hurt

I'm not saying anyone I know ever decided that, I'm just stating it as a fact, that given enough negative experiences, they won't have any pressing motivation to seek a dialogue with us. I'm talking about people who truly try to understand, mind you - I'm not advocating making nice with the homophobes and those who consciously malign us. I'm not saying they avoid us either. But they become paranoid and overly cautious, because they don't want to offend, and this undermines any possibility of a real exchange and understanding.

[sparkindarkness]

But that is depressing. It's depressing to put the duty for reaching past pain and reaching out to the privileged is our duty. And yes it can help - but if our not keeping that smile in place and the teeth gritted is going to drive people away or not have them consider our rights worth it - then what position are we in?

Part of being an ally is learning, growing and understanding. Part of that is listening - and, sadly, part of that is hurting people and facing the reaction to that hurt. It's not always ideal - but can we really ask the hurt people to suck it up and deal?

[beauty_forashes]

I'm not talking about people who don't consider our rights worth it, I'm talking about friends and people who don't oppose us.

Part of being an ally is learning, growing and understanding.

Right. That's part of being a human, gay, straight, white, black and purple with yellow dots. I try to do that too, and not put blinders on and automatically assume every straight person is a priviledged idiot I have license to abuse like I've seen some people in the gay community do. And IMO, people don't like to be preached at, patronized or told how ignorant they are, that cuts off the possibility of learning, growing and understanding from the onset because it puts them on the defensive. It's human.

It's not always ideal - but can we really ask the hurt people to suck it up and deal?Being abused doesn't give me license to abuse others, that sounds like the serial killer getting off easier because he whinges about his bad childhood and shifts blame on that. Being a victim doesn't give me liberty to victimize others, that's just not an excuse

[sparkindarkness]

Well with friends I'm hoping poeople would have a sufficient relationshiop not to need to jump all over them with hoibnailed boots. I have quasi friends who occasionally need a good jumping, but most friends respond to some gentle prodding - nor would I feel the need to leap on friends

[beauty_forashes]

No-one has the need, or even right to be embarrased by someone else methinks.

If it has to do with something affecting me personally, it's an instinctive response, even if I try to have sufficient self-control not to act on it, and it's something that also makes me angry because while passion is good, fanaticism never is. How and why is that different than having an instinctive response to something subjectively hurtful someone else has said, and why do I have the right and reason for one and not the other?