(no subject)

[rm]

While there are a hundred reasons why straight people openly specifying that they are straight and also support the rights of GBLTQ people to marry their partners is a useful thing, think of the power of this:

Just saying that you support it. Without mentioning your own damn orientation.

Because I know it's not always or even often distancing when someone says, "I'm straight but I support gay rights," but trust me, trust me, trust me, trust me, when I tell you that's what it can feel like from over here.

Just try saying it without qualification. Picture _that_ as an LJ meme. You know?

Comments

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

Really? That seems strange to me. I find it very powerful when someone says, "I'm not part of this group, but I will fight for it." Keith Olberman's recent wonderful video, for example, was all the more effective for me because he prefaced it by saying, "I'm not talking about this because it affects me or anyone I'm close to. I'm saying it because it's self-evidently true and universally important." I've also been a fan of those "straight but not narrow" bumper stickers for a long time, but mostly because I'm a yellow-bellied punsucker. Why does it feel distancing to you? It feels like solidarity to me.

[rm.livejournal.com]

I thought it was powerful when Olbermann did it, absolutely, but I think that has to be his job as a pop culture figure.

When I was in college, one of my roommates wrote an editorial for the school paper ostensibly about how she was cool with having a queer roommate. But the whole piece was about all the ways in which she was straight, really, and how I didn't make her gay, really.

I think for many people there's both conscious and unconscious subtext to declaring their heterosexuality before supporting equal marriage rights.

I also think that it reminds people that gay people are "different" -- if we stop starting the argument by emphasizing our differences, maybe our differences will be less important.

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

Hm. There's definitely truth in what you say, but for me the "I'm not gay, I swear" factor is trumped by the "you pick on my friend, you answer to me" factor. Assertions of rights are doubly strong if they're made by both interested and disinterested parties. If you're not sure what you think about the issue and you only hear gay people (or people you assume are gay because they don't state otherwise) saying, "Give me what's mine", it's easy to write it off by saying, "Well, of course they're going to say that, but what do normal people think?" When advocacy is coming from all sides, it's harder to dismiss out of hand. The converse of this is seen in disability issues, where frequently self-advocacy was overshadowed by external advocacy. Disability rights leaders rightly adopted the "nothing about us without us" creed, which made sure that external advocacy wasn't their only recourse, but without rejecting it altogether. With respect to gay rights, I think it's important not to project too insular a front, and I think letting our straight allies identify themselves only strengthens the message. It all comes down to Niemoller for me. I don't think acknowledging difference is the root of the problem. What we need is a universal precept that would overrule perceptions of difference when necessary to preserve human rights, but which would otherwise allow for as much diversity as possible.

[popfiend.livejournal.com]

I hear you, although I admit to doing it myself. I'm trying to recognize and be better though.

It reminds me a lot of the "I have [fill in the blank] friends" preface to any issue regarding said group.

Why I have a familiarity with this issue, I wouldn't know. ;)

[winterknight.livejournal.com]

*grins* I can't even GUESS. Even if it wasn't directed at me, this comment made me feel better.

Now, if you don't mind telling the class how painless it is to say I hear you, although I admit to doing it myself. I'm trying to recognize and be better though., that would be totally awesome of you. <3

[popfiend.livejournal.com]

Honestly, the biggest thing you can ever do for yourself to help yourself grow and adapt and be a friend is to give yourself the "freedom to be wrong."

Being wrong is not the end of the world and we learn more from failure than we do from success.

It's NEVER about BEING right, it's about GETTING IT right.

And that's what the "freedom to be wrong" buys you.

Admitting that you screwed up may not stop you from making the same screw up again, but it will probably keep you from making it a second or third time.

/my 2 cents

And I'm done.

Anyone want my soapbox?

[winterknight.livejournal.com]

This is something I've said so many times, and it is awesomely true, and a good reminder to see it again. I have to remind myself of this every time I wade into a discussion on race, because I have been n00bish about race in the past. (Hell, I've been n00bish about being queer.) I hate screwing up, mostly because I don't like hurting people. But, it hurts everyone if I don't get out there and learn.

You're doing just fine with that soapbox, but you can trade it for this shiny new internetz that you have won.

[popfiend.livejournal.com]

Something I've mentioned in the past when dealing with the issues of racism, sexism and homophobia...saying something that is racist, sexist or homophobic does NOT make you one of those things.

This goes back to the "freedom to be wrong" thing.

Because what happens when you tell someone that they said something that was X, they immediately get defensive and start talking about how they aren't [fill in the blank]. And they probably aren't. But then you aren't arguing the issue anymore, you are arguing the person, and it degrades into the personal.

Saying something that is one of those things, means one thing...that you said something that was one of those things. And if you give yourself the "freedom to be wrong" you get to a place where you can look at your words without feeling personally attacked.

And then you can see, the why.

Mind you sometimes people are one of those things, but it's about more than a singular statement. It is about an overarching attitude. Those willing to look at themselves and their words are less likely to be seen as "the enemy."

But a lot of people need validation at that moment, and so their vision is impaired. /Dalek

Honestly, I say sexist and homophobic things on occasion, however, I'd like to think I'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would call me either, because my overall behavior and because when/if I get called on it I make every attempt to understand and I try to change my behavior accordingly.

That's the measure.

And I think too many people have the goalposts in the wrong location.

/my 4 cents (I talked so long inflationary pressures got to it)

You sure you don't want this soapbox?

I'm much shorter without it.

And thank you for this exchange. I hope our hostess doesn't mind.

[winterknight.livejournal.com]

I'm allergic to soap, so I'll pass. :)

But a lot of people need validation at that moment, and so their vision is impaired. /Dalek Yes, I think that's exactly it. Also, there's this fear of being called racist or homophobic or sexist or misogynist. There doesn't seem to be an easy path for people to say, "I don't want to be that, but I did/said something that made me look like that... I'm going to learn and change." instead of "... I'm going to make sure whatever makes me feel this way STOPS and is sorry about it."

If someone said I was racist, I'd probably say, "I'm trying not to be, how do I try harder?" Because, you know what, it's a really uphill thing. It's possible to be racist/sexist/misogynist and still be a good person, since we are raised in an inherently racist/sexist/misogynist paradigm and raised without the tools for self-examination on those matters. This idea that because you want to be a good person, you ARE, is faulty, when you're raised in a society founded on the idea that some people are more human than others.

And, I do hope rm doesn't mind; this conversation has lightened the impact of dumbassery elsewhere on LJ today (not in this post, mind you). Thanks.

[popfiend.livejournal.com]

Dumbassery on LJ?!?!?!?!

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

On a serious note...thank you for taking the time to listen.

And I'm glad I helped lighten the impact of dumbassery.

[newsbean.livejournal.com]

If only more people understood that saying something -ist (sex-, race-, etc.) doesn't make you one. Too many people are turned off when someone blows up at them for saying something they didn't even understand was wrong. I've seen it happen. And then they walk away feeling like, "Why even try? I'm just going to get it wrong."

Sigh. We just need more compassion. All around.

(I feel like that's mighty soapboxy, but I hope that since I'm agreeing with you that you'll let it go...)

[popfiend.livejournal.com]

I get what you are saying, but I want to touch upon something you said..."Why even try? I'm just going to get it wrong."

That's why I spoke of the "freedom to be wrong."

In this arena, you NEED to give that to yourself.

As much as we need more compassion all around, we also need to be not afraid to screw up and be wrong. That freedom keeps passions low and it keeps our minds open.

And now I will shut up and stop taking over the thread.

Peace.

[newsbean.livejournal.com]

Oh, I completely agree! I just happen to think that in a more compassionate society, more people would feel like it was ok to be wrong. Sometimes it can feel like you're penalized so harshly for being wrong that you internalize that and refuse to ever admit to being wrong.

Just to be clear, I think we're in complete agreement here. I just wish more people would say what you're saying, "It's ok to be wrong." And I wish that they would say it kindly and compassionately to other people.

[feyandstrange.livejournal.com]

Because, to me, it feels like "Let me make darn sure that you don't mistake me for one of those people, but having saved myself from that fate, I actually do believe they're human."

When ninety per cent of the population is supposedly straight, there's no reason for that qualifier unless distancing is wanted.

"I support queer rights."
"Really? What, are you gay?"
"No, I believe in equality for everyone. Don't you?"

Is actually even more powerful in its way, because the original poster *did not feel that their orientation was necessary or relevant* to the statement.