Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘homophobia’ Category

the Natural.

The Natural is the social explanation for strict and conservative governing of human life. The term itself has much to do with forming and sustaining normativity—what is OK and what is not OK. Claiming that something (an object or an act or a phenomenon) isn’t “natural” often ensures society passing unfavorable judgment on it. First we need to break down what “natural” means and how it transitions into the political weapon I will call “the Natural.”

Let us take “natural” to mean that which is necessary to reproduce the human species. (Or, from a Darwinian standpoint, the actions that maximize a creature’s reproduction success.) In this way, “natural” are the qualities and characteristics of animals that bring about reproduction of the species.

How have we arrived at this definition? Does it not seem rather esoteric? Let’s apply it to our current political and social world and, as a result, it ought to make more sense:
If we take “natural” to mean that which is necessary to reproducing the human species, it should then be taken as truth that homosexuality and other non-heterosexual practices are unnatural. Homosexuality is constantly decried as being ‘unnatural’ (and therefore unnecessary) and should be criminalized, discouraged, punished. With the above definition of ‘natural’ at hand, it is a truism that homosexuality (read: all non-hetero sex practices) is unnatural. But, then again, so are countless other daily activities that we practice in an unthinking manner. For example, driving or riding in a car is a profoundly unnatural practice. We can note that driving a car is unnatural because it poses a much greater risk to the driver while on the road than if she left the car at home and walked.
The US Department of Transportation reports that:
There were nearly 6,420,000 auto accidents in the United States in 2005. The financial cost of these crashes is more than 230 Billion dollars. 2.9 million people were injured and 42,636 people killed. About 115 people die every day in vehicle crashes in the United States — one death every 13 minutes.
We can then ask, how many of these 42,636 dead or 2.9 million injured would still be reproductively viable if they had instead walked rather than driven a car? Using our standards of ‘natural’ as it applies to homosexuality (that it is an unnatural act that does not reproduce the human species and should therefore be discouraged), by all accounts, we should be criticizing driving and homosexuality equally for being ‘unnatural’ human acts.

We then have arrived at the crux of the problem of ‘natural’:
How is it that the natural suddenly became synonymous with the good and right?

We can see then that ‘the Natural’ becomes that rare occurrence: the irrational idea which (horrifyingly) simultaneously assumes the role of the authoritative idea. Like religions rooted in dogmatism, the Natural defies logic and steamrolls any criticism of itself, so ingrained is its authority and rightness in the minds of uncritical human beings. This is the inception of the Natural as a political weapon: when it is used to batter those individuals and practices that do not reside firmly in the ‘natural’ realm.

When we see that the Natural is ambiguous and nigh-irrelevant to our daily lives and social interactions, why do we persist in being governed by its irrational ‘laws’? This is the point at which we part ways with the Natural. Combating the Natural should not be done by attempting to “explain” homosexuality in such a way that it fits into the narrow framework of ‘natural.’ No, instead we need to reject the Natural as a force entirely. Pleasure governs us, not nature! We respond to reason and discourse, trading of ideas and dialogue, not some politicized concept of what nature decrees as “right” and “wrong”! This is our praxis…

Read Full Post »

a strong hatred and fear of homosexual people. According to Audre Lorde who wrote “I am your sister: black women organizing across sexualities”, “Homophobia—a terror surrounding feelings of love for members of the same sex and thereby a hatred of those feelings in others”. It means ignoring homosexual people’s identity and lack of understanding the differences of preference. Lorde expresses that “it(Homophobia) puts a terrible weapon into the hands of your enemies toward you to silence you, keep you docile and in line”. Homophobia have a power which oppress homosexual people and rob their liberty that is to love members of the same sex. It also keeps homosexual people isolated from society that Heterosexism is dominant. Homophobia don’t separates women in only their daily life, but it also separates women in the field of political movements.

Read Full Post »

heterosexism

“Heterosexism” is tied to “homophobia” but differs in that heterosexism is a bias in favor of heterosexuality as a cultural attitude and homophobia is the reaction of an individual. Like homophobia, heterosexism discriminates against non heterosexual people or attitudes. I think the two terms are comparable to sexism and sexist, because sexism is a bigger picture, cultural attitude word, whereas sexist is an individual prejudice. Heterosexism is a belief that heterosexuality is the only natural or moral mode of sexual interaction, which makes me wonder if it’s tied to religious (particularly fundamentalist) views?

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 44 other followers