![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elabyIt's International Blog Against Racism Week. There's a comm (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
ibarw) with awesome blog posts galore, but two particularly awesome ones are here:
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
rawles's post about Nyota Uhura
glockgal's post about The Last Airbender
And since IBARW deserves actual blogging, here's something I'm kind of late in the discussion to, but which I think is important nevertheless.
I think it was The Advocate. Anyway, it doesn't matter which magazine it was. While it was, I believe and hope, well-intentioned, I have problems with it.
First: I think drawing comparisons is good. Drawing comparisons helps people understand what other people might be feeling based on something they've felt. When I think of ways to explain something I'm feeling, the first thing I come up with is "It's kind of like if X comparable thing happened to you..." That said, comparison is not implied when you use the word "is" without any modifiers.
Also first: Saying somebody's problems are exactly like somebody else's not only makes person 2 feel like their problems are not as important, it also ignores the fact that everybody's problems are different, because every person is different and how they feel about any given thing is necessarily different from how someone else feels about the same thing.
Okay, time to stop being vague, because I sound silly. I think that saying "Gay is the new black" 1) makes it sound like the struggle for racial equality is over and 2) makes it sound like being gay and being black are entirely the same.
I really don't think the people who use this term meant to imply that the fight for racial equality is over, but - even though we elected Obama, which is a huge step and totally awesome from my perspective - it's really, really not over. It's come a long way, yes, but all you have to do is pick up a fashion magazine and count the models who are people of color. The ratio is usually something like 170 pages to 5 women of color, and that's appalling. Television and movies are the same way (seerawles's post that I linked to for a better perspective on this).
As to the second point, first of all (too many firstlies and secondlies in this post!) this phrase ignores, you know, all of those who are people of color but aren't black. This only makes for more exclusion. And the struggles might be congruent - congruencies are helpful to draw, as long as you do it respectfully - but it's not exactly the same, and one hasn't replaced the other. Perhaps that's not what they meant to imply by using the term, but it's what I thought when I read it, and what people think when they read something like that - whether they read the whole article to understand the authors' intended meaning or not - is significant. The bigotry a person experiences from being gay and from being a person of color are entirely different, and I can only speak from experience on the first of the two. But this is what I understand: When you're gay, much of the time people can't tell by looking at you. The kind of prejudice you would experience when you're a minority who is identifiable immediately is necessarily different - the moment someone sees you, they register something about you and act accordingly. Being gay, people make the same assumptions about you based on your appearance, but if they find out that you're gay, it can change how they feel about you. The effect both of these things have on people is very different. For me it's just about listening to each individual's experiences, respecting them, and realizing that everyone's problems and feelings should be given the same amount of credence.
This isn't even addressing the problems that "gay is the new black" can cause for people who are both gay and a person of color. Even though I would like to think that if you've been the subject of prejudice, it would make you less likely to be prejudiced, it unfortunately doesn't work that way - plenty of gay people are racist and plenty of people of color are anti-gay. The things I've read by gay people of color indicate that finding a way to navigate that is very difficult.
I'm going to end with one of those congruencies I talked about. I don't know what it would be like to be a person of color and read the headline "Gay is the new black," but I do know what it felt like in this situation: at my university, the GLBTQ group sold t-shirts that said "Gay? Fine by me!" I liked that. Some people didn't, because they thought it implied that gay people need someone else's permission or approval or something. I just liked it because I was glad to see that people thought it was okay to be who I was. There's been so much to the contrary, you know? So a good while after the t-shirts became available, I saw somebody walking around campus - and I remember exactly where I was - wearing a t-shirt that said "Conservative? Fine by me!"
Okay. If you're conservative, seriously, it is fine by me. But I wanted to know what they meant by making that t-shirt. If they just wanted to promote being tolerant of other people's political views, then great. But if they were doing it in a way that made fun of another group's struggle, that's a different story. Even if it was irrational, the first thing I felt when I saw that shirt was like I had been insulted. I might have felt the same way if I saw someone wearing a t-shirt with little same-gender figures holding hands and a circle with a slash through it over them. They might not have meant it that way, but that's how I felt.
This situation and "gay is the new black" aren't the same. But somebody had drawn a parallel between something I'd had to face and something they were facing, and it made me feel like they were implying that my problems were unimportant.
ibarw) with awesome blog posts galore, but two particularly awesome ones are here:rawles's post about Nyota Uhuraglockgal's post about The Last AirbenderAnd since IBARW deserves actual blogging, here's something I'm kind of late in the discussion to, but which I think is important nevertheless.
I think it was The Advocate. Anyway, it doesn't matter which magazine it was. While it was, I believe and hope, well-intentioned, I have problems with it.
First: I think drawing comparisons is good. Drawing comparisons helps people understand what other people might be feeling based on something they've felt. When I think of ways to explain something I'm feeling, the first thing I come up with is "It's kind of like if X comparable thing happened to you..." That said, comparison is not implied when you use the word "is" without any modifiers.
Also first: Saying somebody's problems are exactly like somebody else's not only makes person 2 feel like their problems are not as important, it also ignores the fact that everybody's problems are different, because every person is different and how they feel about any given thing is necessarily different from how someone else feels about the same thing.
Okay, time to stop being vague, because I sound silly. I think that saying "Gay is the new black" 1) makes it sound like the struggle for racial equality is over and 2) makes it sound like being gay and being black are entirely the same.
I really don't think the people who use this term meant to imply that the fight for racial equality is over, but - even though we elected Obama, which is a huge step and totally awesome from my perspective - it's really, really not over. It's come a long way, yes, but all you have to do is pick up a fashion magazine and count the models who are people of color. The ratio is usually something like 170 pages to 5 women of color, and that's appalling. Television and movies are the same way (see
rawles's post that I linked to for a better perspective on this).As to the second point, first of all (too many firstlies and secondlies in this post!) this phrase ignores, you know, all of those who are people of color but aren't black. This only makes for more exclusion. And the struggles might be congruent - congruencies are helpful to draw, as long as you do it respectfully - but it's not exactly the same, and one hasn't replaced the other. Perhaps that's not what they meant to imply by using the term, but it's what I thought when I read it, and what people think when they read something like that - whether they read the whole article to understand the authors' intended meaning or not - is significant. The bigotry a person experiences from being gay and from being a person of color are entirely different, and I can only speak from experience on the first of the two. But this is what I understand: When you're gay, much of the time people can't tell by looking at you. The kind of prejudice you would experience when you're a minority who is identifiable immediately is necessarily different - the moment someone sees you, they register something about you and act accordingly. Being gay, people make the same assumptions about you based on your appearance, but if they find out that you're gay, it can change how they feel about you. The effect both of these things have on people is very different. For me it's just about listening to each individual's experiences, respecting them, and realizing that everyone's problems and feelings should be given the same amount of credence.
This isn't even addressing the problems that "gay is the new black" can cause for people who are both gay and a person of color. Even though I would like to think that if you've been the subject of prejudice, it would make you less likely to be prejudiced, it unfortunately doesn't work that way - plenty of gay people are racist and plenty of people of color are anti-gay. The things I've read by gay people of color indicate that finding a way to navigate that is very difficult.
I'm going to end with one of those congruencies I talked about. I don't know what it would be like to be a person of color and read the headline "Gay is the new black," but I do know what it felt like in this situation: at my university, the GLBTQ group sold t-shirts that said "Gay? Fine by me!" I liked that. Some people didn't, because they thought it implied that gay people need someone else's permission or approval or something. I just liked it because I was glad to see that people thought it was okay to be who I was. There's been so much to the contrary, you know? So a good while after the t-shirts became available, I saw somebody walking around campus - and I remember exactly where I was - wearing a t-shirt that said "Conservative? Fine by me!"
Okay. If you're conservative, seriously, it is fine by me. But I wanted to know what they meant by making that t-shirt. If they just wanted to promote being tolerant of other people's political views, then great. But if they were doing it in a way that made fun of another group's struggle, that's a different story. Even if it was irrational, the first thing I felt when I saw that shirt was like I had been insulted. I might have felt the same way if I saw someone wearing a t-shirt with little same-gender figures holding hands and a circle with a slash through it over them. They might not have meant it that way, but that's how I felt.
This situation and "gay is the new black" aren't the same. But somebody had drawn a parallel between something I'd had to face and something they were facing, and it made me feel like they were implying that my problems were unimportant.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-07-31 02:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-31 10:48 pm (UTC)I was surprised to see it on the cover, whichever magazine it was, because it was the only text, in huge letters, and potentially hurtful even if it didn't mean to be.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-01 02:32 pm (UTC)"Gay is the new black" 1) makes it sound like the struggle for racial equality is over and 2) makes it sound like being gay and being black are entirely the same.
These are very good points. It also makes it sound like some sort of a trendy thing, not an important issue. At least that was my initial reaction to that statement. It's extremely insensitive, although I'm fairly sure that it wasn't meant to be. But it gives the impression that it's not taking this issue entirely seriously.
this phrase ignores, you know, all of those who are people of color but aren't black.
Yes, and while "black" is not an offensive term, it is, IMO, an outdated one.
The kind of prejudice you would experience when you're a minority who is identifiable immediately is necessarily different - the moment someone sees you, they register something about you and act accordingly. Being gay, people make the same assumptions about you based on your appearance, but if they find out that you're gay, it can change how they feel about you. The effect both of these things have on people is very different.
This is a very good point.
As are your observations on being both gay and a person of color.
Even if it was irrational, the first thing I felt when I saw that shirt was like I had been insulted.
This also assumes that being gay is a choice. Conservatism is not innate - it's something that is consciously chosen, or at least, developed. There's no comparing the two, really.
May I link to this?
no subject
Date: 2009-08-02 01:54 pm (UTC)It also makes it sound like some sort of a trendy thing, not an important issue.
You're totally right! I forgot about that angle, too. "The new black" is a fashion thing, right? Because black is a clothing color that's always in fashion and always looks classy?
Yes, and while "black" is not an offensive term, it is, IMO, an outdated one.
Yeah, I think it's very hard to decide who is "black," since I'd want to ask someone what they identify as.
This also assumes that being gay is a choice. Conservatism is not innate - it's something that is consciously chosen, or at least, developed.
Yes! And the t-shirt thing wasn't a perfect comparison, because conservatism is seen as sort of the "enemy" of being gay, even if some conservative people don't have a problem with gay people.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-13 05:04 pm (UTC)Annnnd I finally got around to it.
"The new black" is a fashion thing, right? Because black is a clothing color that's always in fashion and always looks classy?
Exactly. "The little black dress" was one that could go anywhere and be appropriate for all occasions. In the fifties, I guess. ;)
Yeah, I think it's very hard to decide who is "black," since I'd want to ask someone what they identify as.
I remember once someone asked Glenda what she preferred to be called: Black? Afro-American? African-American? She said "I prefer to be called "Glenda"." *laughs*
no subject
Date: 2009-08-02 08:49 am (UTC)Anyway, all excellent and very pertinent points made here. I'm very glad I have you on my f'list!
I always feel awkward making comparisons too for exactly the reasons you stated. I do always think it's important to note though that the two similarties in all these cases are the dehumanisation and criminalisation of those involved. The fact that they see people of colour or gay people or any other group as somehow less than human never fails to shock me.
I'm not sure which is worse, disliking someone on sight based on their colour or talking to someone, getting to like them then deciding that you can't possibly like them because of their sexual orientation! I think both are disgraceful in equal measure.
plenty of gay people are racist and plenty of people of color are anti-gay.
That reminded me of when I was still going out with my (now) ex. I was amazed at how many people of colour made anti-semitic jokes. I fear that people will always have prejudice.
"Conservative? Fine by me!"
Yeah, because you're such an oppressed minority! *rolls eyes* I think that sounds like someone taking the piss. I would have been furious at that. They did it because hard-right conservatives are always bitching about how "minority" groups are going to take over and oppress the middle class white man. They're ridiculous and give other conservatives a bad name.
In short, yes, I agree with your very wise and thoughtful words.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-02 02:05 pm (UTC)I'm not sure which is worse, disliking someone on sight based on their colour or talking to someone, getting to like them then deciding that you can't possibly like them because of their sexual orientation! I think both are disgraceful in equal measure.
Seriously. And I think that the hurt people feel in either situation is different but no less important.
I fear that people will always have prejudice.
Yeah, I think you're right. Things have gotten so much better than even 50 years ago, but still... I think it's innate that people fear and dislike what they don't understand or think is different than they are. People can get over this, and I think they're getting better at it, though.
Yeah, because you're such an oppressed minority!
Exactly! Arg! You can imagine the articles in our student journal that came up after this. There was a lot of talk of cultural appropriation.
They did it because hard-right conservatives are always bitching about how "minority" groups are going to take over and oppress the middle class white man. They're ridiculous and give other conservatives a bad name.
Yes! What a threat we are with our less-than-equal rights e_e But seriously, your last sentence is a really good point. I think one of the reasons they did it was because my campus is a pretty liberal place, and I've talked to some conservative friends - people who were conservative economically and about gun laws and things and not about gay rights and gender expression, etc) who felt really harassed at my school. Which I thought totally sucked, and I wish it were different.