Educating Others Tactfully

[SolarMaxx]

It seems to me the biggest obstacle to tolerance and exceptance is the notion that somehow people are able to choose a sexual preference, or set of feeling! I know too many highly educated people who truly believe this.

 

[TetRefine]

At least where I live, it seems that nobody with any real education believes that anymore. Although since I live in a big city that may not be representative of everywhere. Even a lot of people without much education are smart enough to know that notion is total bullshit. I think it has to do more with exposure then just being formally educated in general.

 

My argument is this: why would anyone voluntarily choose to be mocked, ridiculed, bullied, and live in constant fear of rejection and judgement? It defies any common sense logic.

[Cia]

This is where you have to decide how much you care to beat your head against the brick wall ignorance often masquerades as. I usually use logic, like when I told my dad his comments on facebook made me ashamed of him when he went on about how allowing gay people into the Boy Scouts would lead to boys he knows not getting to be involved because of their parent's bigotry, and what a shame it was that the abuse instances would be going up. At that point, he knew I wrote gay romance, but not that I was personally bi. When I challenged him to reflect on the fact that he thought young girls would be in danger of being abused by me--just because I'm attracted to WOMEN and men--based on that stupid view, all because of one simple thing that has nothing to do with abuse, in reality. I also pointed out 1) they were letting in gay scouts, not scout leaders and 2)pedophiles aren't going to raise their hands and say, I'm gay! and make themselves stand out. They operate under the radar, or they go to prison.

 

Now, he's my dad. He has an inherent guilt button I know how to push, and I know how to make him listen to me when I present a logical argument. That same approach might not work on a stranger or casual acquaintance. Only you can decide how you approach people who seem to have a brick wall between their minds and logic and truth. If you do so, at all. Sometimes you just have to ignore idiots.

[W_L]

There's also another question:

 

How many gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered advocates take the time to know their opponents?

 

We have our problem of propagating a stereotype that we believe homophobes are a monolithic (how many stories and movies have you read recently or watched where the parents, friends, or strangers all say the same things about gays), heavily religious (I can probably quote leviticus and Romans in more languages and versions than any one should), and unyielding hatred (They're evil! That's it!).

 

In truth, homophobia is not an inflexible concept, it has degrees as much as our sexuality is not uniform.

 

What I am saying is, both sides need to learn from one another; it can't be a unilateral push by us to educate homophobes; it has to be collaborative and a true open exchange that breaks down bigotry from decades of entrenchment.

 

Sure, you will have some people that you cannot convert over to be PFLAG moms or have old gay liberation guys that can never forgive their treatment during the AIDS scare of the 1980's, but you will get a measure of tolerance and probably faster acceptance with newer generations.

 

The true crusaders for gay rights are not those marching on the streets anymore, they are your friends, your co-workers, and members of your family that have accepted you and you have accepted them into your life.

 

What I want to say as a gay man and a gay author is that we are not alone anymore.

[C J]

Sex, religion, politics, race, nationality, culture.  There are so many things people use to distinguish themselves from others.  There will never be a time when everyone and everything is tolerated.  Humans are too self centered, and that's just the way it's going to stay.  Speaking strictly about sexuality, I don't believe being gay is an issue for most people.  It is in other countries, but not in the U.S.  I feel like people who know me don't think "gay" every time they see me, they think "Chris" and say hi. 

 

I think some people try to push the issue in other people's face by doing silly crap, like marching down the street wearing thongs, and similar stuff.  If you act natural, and forget about your "gayness" then your probably going to get along as well as anybody. 

 

One thing I'm pretty sure of, and I think history proves it, is that nobody will ever see a day when people get along with everyone, no matter what you try to do.  Life, whether your gay or not, is a social venture, and yet nobody can make you play their game unless your willing.  If you believe otherwise then someone besides yourself is your master.

[Graeme]

I've found that the problem usually lies with the definitions being used. The ones that claim it's a choice are correct...because their definition is based on behaviour, not attraction. That is, they define homosexuality by same-sex sexual activity. Since sexual activity is a choice, they are correct to claim that homosexuality (by their definition) is a choice.

 

The more common and scientifically accepted definition, however, is based on attraction, and that's not under conscious control. It's not a choice. So, by that definition, homosexuality is not a choice.

 

Solarmaxx -- do those highly educated people say that attraction is a choice, or that homosexuality is a choice? I suspect it's the latter, and you're then applied the usual definition of homosexuality to extrapolate that they're claiming that attraction is a choice. If you check, I'm sure you'll find that their definition is based on behaviour, not attraction.

 

In their defence, the claims of homosexuality within the animal community are based on observed behaviour. If that's the definition used for the animal kingdom, why do we have a different definition for human homosexuality? The answer is, of course, that for humans we're able to dig deeper to the underlying reasons by investigating motives -- something we can't do for the animal kingdom. But it makes it clearer why there's often confusion as to definition what is homosexuality.

[Bill W]

WL is correct when he says not everyone that is homophobic is the same.  However, there is one thing I believe can be said that might be wise to consider.  It's impossible to argue with ignorance and opinion.  Most opinions are not based on facts and are merely something the person accepts as true.  Sometimes this is due to the old adage that if you say something often enough and loud enough, people will begin to believe it.  Another way of saying this is that if you throw enough crap against the wall, some of it is bound to stick.  In most of these cases, it is useless to try to persuade te person otherwise or attempt to convince them they are wrong.  In such cases, it's better to move on and stop wasting your time.  Stick to those you can reason with and write the others off as a lost cause, because you'll never change them.  If you don't believe that, just look at those that would like to return to the days of Jim Crow or before the women's rights movement. 

[zaf89]

I've had marginal success in the past with the old standard, "if it's a choice and I can make myself straight, then go ahead- make yourself gay!" thing. Try pointing out the absurdity of their claim, turn the tables on them. Of course, some people will cling to their ignorance regardless, unless they're truly seeking answers. Most of the time people engaging in those kinds of conversations are probably just looking for an audience for their spiel. And that's fine, there's nothing we can do about it. Sometimes the best thing we can do as individuals is just live our lives openly and honestly, be a role model for questioning/closeted youths, and hope that as each future generation progresses, the need for a "closet" at all becomes smaller and smaller.

 

Of course, I'm not talking about the truly virulent homophobes, the gay bashers, hate criminals, and "death to the gays/recriminalize sodomy" crowd- those people will never be educated, unless they are very young and just playing out what they've learned from their parents or community. I think the best we can hope for is that eventually this breed of bigot will die out, or be shamed into silence.

[Zombie]

It's impossible to argue with ignorance and opinion.  Most opinions are not based on facts and are merely something the person accepts as true. 

 

*sighs* too true, Bill

 

And Graeme is right about distinguishing between attraction and behaviour, or "choice". So, someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes, who - if they found the "right one" - could settle down with a partner of either sex, then if that person decides to go to a club to try and meet someone and chooses to find a gay club... that is a choice. But, once inside, whoever they hook up with will be a matter of attraction over which we have no control

 

[Aditus]

Sure, you will have some people that you cannot convert over to be PFLAG moms or have old gay liberation guys that can never forgive their treatment during the AIDS scare of the 1980's, but you will get a measure of tolerance and probably faster acceptance with newer generations.

 

How I wish this were true. My nephew is fourteen. He made a short play for English class with two friends. He dressed as a girl. He borrowed a dress, his sister did the make-up. He wears his blond hair shoulder long btw. He was shocked at the reaction he got. The tamer were something like: Why do you dress like a girl? He: It's for a play. They: Oh okay, otherwise I had to hit you. He: Why? They: If you were gay I had to hit you easy as pie.

He had many discussions with other students and teachers. The teachers were okay but the students not so much. He tried to explain the difference between attraction and how you behave. More often than he liked he got: Well if you act on it we'll beat the crap outta you.

[Kitt]

. More often than he liked he got: Well if you act on it we'll beat the crap outta you.

Unfortunately those kids were taught to hate. They didn't just adopt that opinion out of the blue. Hatred is a powerful emotion that usually hurts the hater more than the object of hatred. I truly feel sorry for the homophobic who will never get to know some of the wonderful people I have met that happen to be gay. It really is their loss!

[W_L]

How I wish this were true. My nephew is fourteen. He made a short play for English class with two friends. He dressed as a girl. He borrowed a dress, his sister did the make-up. He wears his blond hair shoulder long btw. He was shocked at the reaction he got. The tamer were something like: Why do you dress like a girl? He: It's for a play. They: Oh okay, otherwise I had to hit you. He: Why? They: If you were gay I had to hit you easy as pie.

He had many discussions with other students and teachers. The teachers were okay but the students not so much. He tried to explain the difference between attraction and how you behave. More often than he liked he got: Well if you act on it we'll beat the crap outta you.

 

Note to self: high school needs more butch gay jocks

 

A few decades ago, he'd be beaten up for wearing a dress no questions asked. Now, at least there is Q&A. That is progress.

[Aditus]

What made you think he isn't a jock? That he wore his sister's dress for a play?

[Graeme]

Unfortunately those kids were taught to hate. They didn't just adopt that opinion out of the blue. Hatred is a powerful emotion that usually hurts the hater more than the object of hatred. I truly feel sorry for the homophobic who will never get to know some of the wonderful people I have met that happen to be gay. It really is their loss!

Without having detailed knowledge of the incident I may be wrong, but I have to disagree. Kids at that age are not taught to hate -- they're taught to fear. In particular, they're taught to be afraid of rejection, of not belonging to the group. Peer pressure makes them conform, and makes them attack things that are not the norm.

 

It's not hatred. It's the fear of not belonging that is the primary driver at that age.

[Aditus]

I think it was a little bit of both. They were taught by their family and they wanted to belong to the other kids of their (religious) group, at least the majority of them.

[Irritable1]

I don't feel that there's a way to be tactful with someone who wants a say in your sex life, or the right to judge your sex life when it has nothing whatsoever to do with them. I truly think it's just a way for the unintelligent to try and assert power. 

Edited July 22, 2014 by Irritable1

[W_L]

What made you think he isn't a jock? That he wore his sister's dress for a play?

 

We need more open minded gay jocks , just saying

 

The problem from the gay effeminate stereotype is that boys are taught to have an aversion to feminine side of things at a young age, not merely because they are taught to hate gays, but that they are taught that gender roles is what defines you.

 

These kids aren't homophobes, yet, they are just anti-feminine. If there were a few butch gay jocks around, I think the issue around this nascent gender role problem would be solved more easily.

Edited July 25, 2014 by W_L

[Zombie]

These kids aren't homophobes, yet, they are just anti-feminist.

 

I've never met a 14 yo who had the slightest interest in gender politics.

 

I agree with Graeme that "It's the fear of not belonging that is the primary driver at that age" which goes hand in hand with the rejection of difference. These feelings are instinctual and need to be addressed at an early age before they become ingrained.

[Thorn Wilde]

W_L has a good point when he argues that the crusaders of gay rights are straight allies. Women's suffrage would not have happened if they hadn't had support from men. Black civil rights would not have happened without support from key members of the white majority. That does not mean that minority champions of their causes are not heroes. It starts with one member of a minority saying, no, I won't let you oppress me anymore. But it's naïve to think that a revolution will happen without support from the masses. 

 

Homophobic straight manly men don't listen to queers; they listen to other straight manly men. Christian fundamentalists don't listen to 'sinners' and 'heathens', they listen to other Christians. That's the key. We have to keep talking to folks that will listen. The ones who won't can't be convinced by us, but they may be able to be convinced by other members of their group.

 

 

A few decades ago, he'd be beaten up for wearing a dress no questions asked. Now, at least there is Q&A. That is progress.

 

 

A few centuries ago women weren't allowed to be actors, and all female roles were played by effeminate men. *shrug* These men were the superstars of the day, and while some of them certainly were gay behind closed doors, no one thought that dressing like a woman made a man gay, any more than they thought wearing a horse costume made them zoophiliacs.

[W_L]

Gender roles is not the same as a glass ceiling argument

 

Interest is not needed

 

 

I've never met a 14 yo who had the slightest interest in gender politics.

[Zombie]

Gender roles is not the same as a glass ceiling argument

 

Interest is not needed

 

"Gender roles" and "glass ceilings" - no-one's mentioned either of these so your last post's a non-sequitur.

 

The term you actually used was "anti-feminist". This has a much wider meaning than the somewhat narrower terms you've just used and is very much about "gender politics".

 

So when you posted "These kids ... are just anti-feminist" it was fair comment to point out that "I've never met a 14 yo who had the slightest interest in gender politics"

 

btw if you're interested in learning about gender politics you could begin by reading Germaine Greer's The Female Eunuch

 

 

 

.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Zombie

[Kitt]

We need more open minded gay jocks , just saying

 

I think what the world needs is more open minded.....everyone!

[Irritable1]

I read it as intended to convey "anti-effeminate."

[Zombie]

I read it as intended to convey "anti-effeminate."

 

That makes more sense... but then the sentence becomes "These kids aren't homophobes, yet, they are just anti-effeminate".

 

But this is inherently contradictory. Not all homosexuals are macho and butch, many are and always have been effeminate. To claim that prejudice and / or discrimination is not homophobic when it is only directed at effeminate gays is outrageous.

[Irritable1]

That makes more sense... but then the sentence becomes "These kids aren't homophobes, yet, they are just anti-effeminate".

 

But this is inherently contradictory. Not all homosexuals are macho and butch, many are and always have been effeminate. To claim that prejudice and / or discrimination is not homophobic when it is only directed at effeminate gays is outrageou

 

I think there is a difference between homophobia and hostility to people who do not meet stereotypical gender norms. Edit: though I'm not sure whether I believe that there's a moral difference.  But I agree that kids are more likely to knee-jerk into the latter, and there's a chance to help them out of it..

Edited July 23, 2014 by Irritable1