"Normal" is a word best left to the right wing religious fundamentalists who can't see past their own rose coloured glasses and white-picket fence ;-)
Heteronormativity should be opposed every step of the way by straights and queers alike. If there was such a thing as "queernormativity" I would equally oppose that
concept too!
Diversity is the only concept we should be promoting.
I came to the same conclusion about the refugee debate. Refugee activist groups were playing on the "they are the same as us" line, and that failed to wash with the majority of conservative Australians because they failed to see the similarities and instead focussed on the differences.
Yet it is the differences that should be highlighted to ensure that the average Jo Citizen is educated in the need for multiculturalism, diversity of sexuality, gender variance, racial harmony and religious acceptance.
Tolerance is about seeing the differences but grudgingly putting up with them because the law or the culture expects you to accommodate everyone. Respect is about understanding that the differences exist and supporting the individual's rights of human expression and being, often in spite of the prevailing law or culture.
Sport or War?
The international live coverage is exceptional on the syndicated "Wide World of War", even if it might be a little biased in favour of the visiting team, the Coalition Invaders.
We are nearing the end of the first quarter in this game with the Invaders clearly ahead on points over the Baghdad Baddies. However the home team appear to be holding back, perhaps leading the Invaders into a false sense of security and saving their best for a powerful battle at the halfway mark.
There have been numerous allegations from the coalition team claiming that the Baghdaddies are using or intending to use banned performance enhancing systems, but so far the independent inspectors have not been able to detect anything. There was even allegations that the team were intending to supply these enhancements to other teams for future games against the Coalition in the World Domination Cup.
Sportsmanship is all important and this type of aggressive behaviour from the world champions can only be considered as underhanded, unfair and unjustified play.
Some may call me a traitor, but I'm changing my allegiance and will be barracking for the underdog in this game.
It is about time that the coalition got a massive whoopin' as they've been getting more arrogant in the last few seasons. As the world watches intently, the question on many spectators' lips is "Whose your Baghdaddy?" !!
Iraq, Iraq, Iraq ... oil, oil, oil!!
[+/-] show/hide this post
Phobia vs ism
REGARDING THE LIMITATION OF USING THE TERM "HOMOPHOBIA"
Wouldn't it be just easier to talk about and use the terms "heterosexism"(1) and "heteronormativity"(2)? Of course this might take some education, but it is inclusive and more accurate terminology.
Most acts of discrimination, vilification and yobbish behaviour are not homophobia, biphobia or transphobia (all being the fear of 'x') but are resultant from attitudes of normalcy or even superiority from a heterosexual perspective.
It is the same attitudes that cause sexism, racism, nazism, anti-semitism etc. It is definitely an ism rather than a phobia. Even though there are a few clinical phobics out there, those people are more likely to shun us or campaign against us rather than attack.
Focussing on 'anti-gay', 'anti-lesbian' or even 'anti-bi' or 'anti-trans' behaviour is not appropriate because the specificity of these focal points always means that a fringe group is left out. Using the term homophobia to try and encompass all the above is also incorrect and reduces the visibility of key segments. What about the heterosexual transvestite or the straight fag hag?
The English language is poor by anyone's definition, but the best terms that I know (when explained correctly) are heterosexism and heteronormativity. They also put the problem fairly and squarely on the perpetrators, being (generally speaking) the hetero side of the fence, rather than focussing on the identity of the victims.
check out: this site
As I state in one of my personal signature file, "End heterosexism - embrace diversity".
(1) HETEROSEXISM
The assumption that everyone is a heterosexual until it is otherwise known and that being heterosexual is the proper sexual orientation.
(2) HETERONORMATIVE
the prevailing culture that falsely views heterosexuality as ‘normal’ behaviour and alternative sexuality or gender identity as deviant. i.e. the nuclear family on the qtr acre block with a white picket fence, a dog, cat and a Holden Commodore is considered heteronormative. Anyone falling outside the "norms" characterised by a generalised view of heterosexual society would be considered non-heteronormative.
Here is a more detailed definition of the concept:
By heteronormativity we mean the institutions, structures of understanding, and practical orientations that make heterosexuality seem not only coherent--that is, organized as a sexuality--but also privileged.
Its coherence is always provisional, and its privilege can take several (sometimes contradictory) forms; unmarked, as the basic idiom of the personal and the social; or marked as a natural state; or projected as an ideal or moral accomplishment.
It consists less of norms that could be summarized as a body of doctrine than of a sense of rightness produced in contradictory manifestations--often unconscious, immanent to practice or to institutions. Contexts that have little visible relation to sex practice, such as life narrative and generational identity, can be heteronormative in this sense, while in other contexts forms of sex between men and women might not be heteronormative.
Heteronormativity is thus a concept distinct from heterosexuality. One of the most conspicuous differences is that it has no parallel, unlike heterosexuality, which organizes homosexuality as its opposite. Because homosexuality can never have the invisible, tacit, society-founding rightness that heterosexuality has, it would not be possible to speak of "homonormativity" in the same sense.
See Michael Warner, "fear of a Queer Planet," Social Text, no. 29 (1991): 3-17."
Source: University of Chicago
[+/-] show/hide this post
Leader or Lap Dog?
LETTER SENT TO VARIOUS NEWSPAPERS AND CC'D TO THE GOVERNOR GENERAL
Where is the representative of our Head of State, the Commander in Chief of the armed forces, our Governor General, His Excellency Dr Hollingworth? What are we paying him for?
Surely a man of conviction with thought and care for the human casualties of war, especially a former Archbishop of a Christian sect, would be at pains to command such an unnecessary and unjust invasion of another nation?
He has the power to stop Australian participation in a conflict with Iraq and he has the power to sack the Prime Minister.
Then again, Peter is just another political appointee playing the dutiful role of yes-man to a loyal US lap-dog!
Heel, boy! ... sit! ... good dog!
Why are world leaders so gung ho for war?
Even more disappointing and of greater concern to me, was watching a television news report which had a brief interview with one of the UK servicemen in the Middle East.
He happily stated that the forces were ready and would be very disappointed if they were sent home without going to war!
If that guy is so eager to potentially get himself killed, or worse, murder hundreds or thousands of Iraqis, then I must concede that I can have no faith in the integrity of our armed forces.
It seems that the rumours of brainwashing troops to be gung-ho killers is not absent of some truth.
What a sad world we live in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)