A whole lot of isms, but mostly heterosexism.

[strange_tomato]

Given that this Sunday, May 17, is the International Day Against Homophobia, it's interesting that I was recently called out for being heterosexist. To my face, by a lesbian. I was pretty embarrassed. (Not that it would be any better to have this pointed out in another way, but I felt pretty careless.)

Comments

[allysonsimming]

I was more thinking that there are probably a LOT of groups that aren't represented in culture -- for example, in the United States people of Asian and African-American descent are usually represented in most instances, but homosexuals as well as Native Americans, people of Middle Eastern and Indian descent, etc. are often not represented. It seems to me that you'd be hard-pressed to find something that represents EVERYONE at all times.

To me it just seems like more of a "choose your battles" kind of thing. While I'm sure it must be irritating to feel like you're not being represented on a community event poster, there are bigger fish to fry -- your example of homosexuality in cartoons and children's programs is a great one -- and I just feel like there are some things you just have to let go. Aside from white males, almost everyone faces prejudice or misrepresentation or lack of representation in American culture, and things would probably get out of hand if everyone was constantly challenging everything that they saw.

Does that make sense? I've been writing papers for school for two weeks now and my brain is absolute mush so I'm not sure if I'm even explaining correctly what I'm trying to say. I wasn't meaning to say that it doesn't matter at all that there were no same-sex couples on the poster -- just that maybe that something like that isn't the kind of thing that is worth getting upset over.

[leskuh]

Hee, yeah I gotcha. I know it would be next to impossible to represent every group or anything like that. I don't think Strange should HAVE to do it either, because well... it'd take years and nothing would get done obviously. So I'm sure the poster is fine and that after awhile it's just getting nitpicky. But I can also understand why the other person who wasn't being represented (especially if this is something that happens A LOT) would speak up and say: "Hey, you forgot about me."

And yeah, there are bigger issues, but I don't think that takes away from some of the smaller things either. And it's always good when someone makes aware of something that you honestly just hadn't thought of. So I think it's good that the lady spoke up, but yeah I definitely would never say that Strange is heterosexist because... she's really not. Just talking to her you can tell that she is very aware of sexuality and representation and all that good stuff.

[allysonsimming]

Exactly. It's not that she shouldn't have said anything about it, but maybe the way she brought it up could have been a bit politer since there was obviously not any bad intentions behind the poster.

[strange_tomato]

Yeah, she wasn't really rude about it, but she was pretty direct. I didn't mind. (I should have added that "this story may have been exaggerated to make it more interesting.")

[crushthecamera]

The "should have been more polite/should have worded it differently/etc." thing is what's generally known as a tone argument. That link is fandom- and racism-specific, but it applies to other oppressions, too.

I think what some people might not understand is that much of the time, the only time someone will point out an -ism in their everyday life is when they genuinely think highly enough of you (general you) to know that you're probably not intentionally being a jerk, so they say, "Hey, [thing you did/said] wasn't cool." I mean, I'm not really interested in getting into a debate with Fred Phelps, for example, because he isn't going to listen and it'd just be a frustrating and exhausting waste of time. But one of my friends, someone who I know to generally be thoughtful and have good intentions? I am going to point it out, because I don't think my friends want to unintentionally be jerks. Does that make sense? (It's a bit late here; I'm getting talky.)

[allysonsimming]

That makes sense, and I think I misread the entry and thought that the woman actually outright called strangetomato heterosexist, which doesn't seem to be the case.

However, I have always been taught that you catch more flies with honey. Not that people shouldn't stand up for themselves, and not that people should be pleading or fawning when they address important issues -- but in general, calling people names or accusing them of being racist or sexist or homophobic (even if they are) just aggravates the situation and leads them to shut out any positive message they could possibly receive. Firmly but politely telling someone that they are infringing on your rights is the best way to approach things, I think. But that's just my opinion. :)

[crushthecamera]

I agree that if someone were to fly into a rage or something it'd be perhaps just slightly inappropriate, but I've never actually seen that happen. What I have seen happen essentially boils down to, "Hey, if you don't tack a 'please' onto that 'stop stomping on my fingers!' then I'm just not going to listen." which I think isn't very cool.

I also agree that to some extent when you're trying to explain things to people who are just starting out on this, and whose knowledge of oppressions is thus understandably simplistic, it can be hard to get them to listen when you start using words that to them means, essentially, "Bad, evil, puppy kicker!" I like "problematic" and variations on that theme for that very reason. It's not so loaded, it doesn't make people instantly go into defensive mode, but it still gets the point across that what they did/said upset you. I think we basically agree. :)