Identity and Lesbianism
Oct. 1st, 2008 10:10 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hector_rashbaumSo I wanna talk about identity. Because I've gotten a few times lately, from a few different people, the implication - if not direct statement - that I am somehow wrong, or naive, or stupid/foolish/what-have-you for considering my lesbianism a defining characteristic.
And part of the reason I don't talk about it is it requires saying "straight people generally don't have this problem" and I find people react so weirdly to that - which I think comes from what I posted about yesterday, this idea of finite problems. Because if there are, I dunno, only two problems in the world and gay people say "this is only a gay problem" and POC say "this is only a POC problem", the implication is that straight people, white people, have no problems. But problems are most definitely not finite, and no one is saying "this is a strictly gay issue, straight people don't have issues". So the defensiveness is really out of place.
But here it is. See...there are a lot of facets to my identity. I'm a lesbian, I'm a cat person, I'm a student, I'm a glasses-wearer, I'm an oldest child with middle-child syndrome, I have anxiety problems, I'm fat, etc.
Some of those are less important. I could be a dog person without being a different person, I could have good eyesight and not be different, I could be a middle child and be the same old me.
But there are things on that list that are fundamental to who I am. I would have had vastly different life experiences if I weren't fat, and thus the person I am today would not be the same. And my experiences from here on out will be different than if everything else were the same but 100 pounds lighter, the way I parse things is different, I am different. And in the same way, my life - and the person I am - would be extremely different were I straight.
I pull out those two examples for a reason: they are things that society (either as a whole, or just massive parts) tell me I should be ashamed of. So merely by not being ashamed - by accepting that this is what I look like, and I will focus on my health and not worry about the looks, by saying there is nothing wrong with me being attracted to and loving women exclusively - I am fighting. And this is the problem straight people don't have - that daily struggle, the near-constant need to prove you're normal, you're worth being treated like a human.
(And really, people, do I need to say this? YES I understand discrimination against gays isn't the only kind that exists, what kind of idiot do you think I am? Focusing on one specific discrimination in one specific context isn't the same as saying "I'm the only person who's ever been discriminated against ever")
And that's where it starts to look like I'm privileging one facet of my identity over any others - because that one facet is under attack. Because, yes, all things being equal being gay would be no different than being straight, but what world do you live in where all things are equal? So I have to fight (well...I don't have to, but to put it baldly I consider people who lie back and take their oppression with open arms fools), and so I have to call attention, and then rather than getting it from one side with "you're not okay" I get from the other side "you're not identifying right".
So here it is, in simplest terms. When something I consider fundamental to my identity is under attack, I will fight back. Fighting back requires calling attention; calling attention gives the impression of valuing one facet over another. This doesn't mean I consider being a lesbian the be-all end-all of Me - but nor does it mean I don't consider it more important than other things.
Or, Hell, have it in even simpler terms: Shut the fuck up and stop telling me how to parse my own identity, you privileged assholes.
And part of the reason I don't talk about it is it requires saying "straight people generally don't have this problem" and I find people react so weirdly to that - which I think comes from what I posted about yesterday, this idea of finite problems. Because if there are, I dunno, only two problems in the world and gay people say "this is only a gay problem" and POC say "this is only a POC problem", the implication is that straight people, white people, have no problems. But problems are most definitely not finite, and no one is saying "this is a strictly gay issue, straight people don't have issues". So the defensiveness is really out of place.
But here it is. See...there are a lot of facets to my identity. I'm a lesbian, I'm a cat person, I'm a student, I'm a glasses-wearer, I'm an oldest child with middle-child syndrome, I have anxiety problems, I'm fat, etc.
Some of those are less important. I could be a dog person without being a different person, I could have good eyesight and not be different, I could be a middle child and be the same old me.
But there are things on that list that are fundamental to who I am. I would have had vastly different life experiences if I weren't fat, and thus the person I am today would not be the same. And my experiences from here on out will be different than if everything else were the same but 100 pounds lighter, the way I parse things is different, I am different. And in the same way, my life - and the person I am - would be extremely different were I straight.
I pull out those two examples for a reason: they are things that society (either as a whole, or just massive parts) tell me I should be ashamed of. So merely by not being ashamed - by accepting that this is what I look like, and I will focus on my health and not worry about the looks, by saying there is nothing wrong with me being attracted to and loving women exclusively - I am fighting. And this is the problem straight people don't have - that daily struggle, the near-constant need to prove you're normal, you're worth being treated like a human.
(And really, people, do I need to say this? YES I understand discrimination against gays isn't the only kind that exists, what kind of idiot do you think I am? Focusing on one specific discrimination in one specific context isn't the same as saying "I'm the only person who's ever been discriminated against ever")
And that's where it starts to look like I'm privileging one facet of my identity over any others - because that one facet is under attack. Because, yes, all things being equal being gay would be no different than being straight, but what world do you live in where all things are equal? So I have to fight (well...I don't have to, but to put it baldly I consider people who lie back and take their oppression with open arms fools), and so I have to call attention, and then rather than getting it from one side with "you're not okay" I get from the other side "you're not identifying right".
So here it is, in simplest terms. When something I consider fundamental to my identity is under attack, I will fight back. Fighting back requires calling attention; calling attention gives the impression of valuing one facet over another. This doesn't mean I consider being a lesbian the be-all end-all of Me - but nor does it mean I don't consider it more important than other things.
Or, Hell, have it in even simpler terms: Shut the fuck up and stop telling me how to parse my own identity, you privileged assholes.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-01 06:51 pm (UTC)FTW
no subject
Date: 2008-10-01 07:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-01 09:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-02 06:43 pm (UTC)Wow - I can only guess that might have been directed at me and what I posted after reading one of your posts. I obviously DID NOT come across as I had hoped to. I brought up other examples to try to relay that you weren't alone in thinking that in some way you were discriminated against, or marginalized, or whatever term you wish to use - it was not done to diminish what you were saying. What I was trying to convey - and apparently did rather badly - was that while I could not understand where you were coming from in your subjective view of the world and your place in it, that neither could you put yourself subjectively in another's place.
If I insulted you in some way, I apologize as that was not my intent. If you could have heard the tone of my voice when speaking what I wrote I would hope you would have realized that I also was trying to "understand" and learn. Again, if my words came across wrong, I am sorry about that.
Sunstreaked
no subject
Date: 2008-10-02 07:05 pm (UTC)And...hm. I'm not sure if the problem was you or me, but clearly there was some massive breakdown in communication.
I think my problem started here:
If you think that gay people (sorry if that is not the PC term), are singled out for stereotypical characterization, then you might consider what it means to be an older woman, or a black person, or an Asian, or a Muslim, or any other person in a group outside what society considers “the norm”.
I never said gay people were singled out; I even went out of my way to acknowledge that I was oversimplifying by only focusing one one. And it's reminiscent of a very common shut-down technique; comes very close to "why are you talking about x when there's y in the world?", which is something people pull out when they want to shut you up because they dislike the current line of conversation.
Part of the stereotypical problem, as I (speaking only for myself) see it, is that it seems as if those who are gay “announce” it as if that, and only that, defines them. It’s something I don’t understand.
This...I covered in my post. But I'd like to add that what I want to identify as, what I consider to define me, does not excuse judging me or writing me off as a stereotype.
And I take huge exception to you presenting judging people as a fact of life that should be accepted. Because that line of thinking is self-fulfilling: when you say "it's just like that", nothing changes, so "it" stays just like that. To say snap judgments are unfair, but to say you're still going to do it...doesn't sit right with me. When anyone does it, I don't mean to imply I'm singling you out.
(I won't even go into how many issues I have with correlating dress and behavior in the case of "revealing clothes=slut", or the serious problems I have with "slut" in general - punishing women for having sex drives! Awesome.)
no subject
Date: 2008-10-02 07:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-02 08:36 pm (UTC)No, it’s not okay to judge, but it is done, by everyone. What makes people great is that almost all of us work to get past that first “judgment” and know the person behind the “cover”. What changes is the individual, working one by one, to get past the initial impression, but hopefully you can at least see my point, having lived over twice as long as you have so far, that the world has been this way for a very long time. World in general, it’s the individuals who make their own changes. BTW, living longer doesn’t make me smarter, just an example of experience.
Let’s say I have a problem with fundamentalist Christians – the ones who believe the world is only 6,000 years old, that every word of the bible is literal, and all that those beliefs imply. Let’s also say that I’ve had experience dealing with them for many, many years, with typical responses on their behalf. Is it possible that I could “judge” the next one I meet based on my experiences over the past years? Would I still take the time to get behind the initial presentation – yes. But is it possible that exposure over and over and over again along certain lines does in and of itself cause stereotypical judgments?
As you had stated, you were “over-simplifying” by focusing on one. I wasn’t trying to shut anything down, just bringing up that it wasn’t unique. No matter how I say this, I’m gonna sound condescending but I have to try the best I can. It is my belief that at your current age you are still learning who you are as a person – I’m certainly not the same person I was at 20, or at 30, or at 40. So much has changed over the years that sometimes that 20 year old seems a different person. Yeah, the same old argument from older people that you’ll see things differently when YOU’RE older – lol – but how can I prove that? I can’t to your satisfaction, I can only go on what people who are 30 plus years older than you have said.
Also, another of the “elephants” I threw in there was the “slut” dress – and that comes from being old enough to remember that during rape trials what the victim wore, or where she was, or what time of freaking night it was often DETERMINED the outcome of the trial. I don’t have a problem with a woman’s sexuality – don’t forget I grew up pre-herpes and pre-hiv/aids, so I would imagine my experience is somewhat different than yours or anyone else’s this day and age. I certainly enjoyed that age. BUT, if someone dresses conservatively versus sexually, you have to acknowledge that there is different treatment in general by those they encounter. THAT’S where I was going with that – just because something is a fact and we would all like it to change doesn’t mean it’s going to unless EACH individual changes.
I was actually trying to understand where you were coming from, while admitting some of my own ignorance on the subject. There’s nothing so far I’ve seen of what you’ve written than gives me any idea you can’t read a little between the lines of my words to my intent and not focus on semantics. I’m sure we could both pick apart words and phrases to show that the other was whatever we wanted them to be, but I certainly never wanted anything like that with you. I find your journaling interesting and appealing written. I like hearing about ideas I might not have considered to such a deep level prior, and perhaps to have an exchange of ideas. I hope that happens. Peace.
Sunstreaked
no subject
Date: 2008-10-03 12:13 pm (UTC)