Back when I was in Forget Me Not, my role was as one of the two dressing room dancers. Myself and the male dressing room dancer were partially dressed, like we were midway though getting ready for an evening out. We were in the theater's dressing room and we'd wait for patrons to come in, put albums on the old 1970s-style turntable and dance with them, whispering stories in their ears. It was awkward and intimate, and we each danced with patrons of all genders, and only a very, very few were rude and/or groped us. But it was a very draining show (since, you know, later we had to put audience members in coffins and wheel them out of the theater), and we worried about it a lot. I'm flabberghasted that people are being so boorish about this art show.
In brief:
- Writing slash or not has no bearing on whether you are homophobic or not.
- Liking slash or not has no bearing on whether you are homophobic or not.
- Equating slash with Real Queer People or Real Queer Narratives is dodgy at best. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
- Writing and/or liking slash may or may not mean you've strayed into the fetishization of queer people, something that has a negative impact on queer people. These issues are not clear cut. At all. And asking them to be, from any side of the discussion, is problematic.
- While fiction of all sorts can be used to examine social issues and can be a form of activism, it is not an automatic free pass to being a Big Gay Hero or a Big Hero for Gays.
- People don't decide to be trans.
- Equating someone's gender identity with (inappropriate and uncool) pressure you may be feeling in fandom to be a slasher is uncool.
- "I'm not homophobic, but..." is never a way to win whatever argument you think you're about to be having.
How many times are we going to have to have this conversation, oh Internets?
no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 11:13 am (UTC)Now, I'm willing to believe that this is completely outside of their threat model, and they don't have the staff and/or resources to do anything about it (nor the ability to obtain more of either), and that was the nicest way they had of expressing it. OTOH, it's odd that this is outside of their threat model, and extra odd if it's outside of their threat model going forward.
There's a larger philosophical point here about the idea that "it's not the US government's job to 'have your back', that's what families and charities are for.", and how that meshes into the whole US health care debate. I'll have to think about that more.
no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 12:16 pm (UTC)It's one of those shitty things people like to say our country was founded on.
Sigh.
no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 01:21 pm (UTC)(It'd be more coherent than anything Palin could manage anyway)
no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 01:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 06:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 12:27 pm (UTC)Honestly? The airlines ARE supposed to be handling the care and feeding of the stranded travellers, under both EUR and US laws. And for the most part, they seem to be doing so. The Consulate will bail you out of jail if they have to, but right now the job is pretty firmly in the airlines' court. If part of it isn't, or if they fail, then call the Embassy. AFAIK nobody's life is in danger here.
That said: last I heard the London consular office had maybe a dozen full-time staff, many of whom are busy handling visa/passport requests. They're used to a handful of stranded/needy Americans, not this influx. And it's a lot easier for the airlines to lay on extra staff.
That said: it'd be nice if State as a whole or USGOV made some kind of statement of reassurance and make-nice.
no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 01:22 pm (UTC)But but but - that is what it's for! If it's not there to have my back then why why why do we even have it?!
no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 02:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-04-19 04:36 pm (UTC)