Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Dems Hate Oreos....does Party Trump Race?

martinguerre · 11-10-2005, 02:38 PM

two things...

dissociation, and condoning: there's obviously a fine line involved in deciding how much agreement one seeks from someone before labeling them a traitor. but i fail to see how in American political life, where we have pretty well absolute freedom to make political statements...that failing to stand against something *while holding a position of power* isn't the same as silent affirmation. If you can do something to stop a bill and you don't....that at least says you're not opposed to it. I'm wary to draw parallels to less liberal democratic (i mean small caps on both) societies...

The who: the question isn't hetero vs. non-hetero. i think the question is straight vs. queer. They are positional and perspectival labels. A person who is queer is one whose sexual/gender idenity or presentation places them in conflict with a heteronormative society (one that demands straight idenity and polices gender roles). Thus, a man who is percieved as "effeminate" might be hetero, but still be queer in that his gender idenity causes conflict with a heterosexist society. Or, a woman who is a ally to the community might be percieved through one of the classic tropes of the "dyke" or as a bitch because of her advocacy...even if she sleeps with men. It isn't who you fuck. It's who society thinks you are because of who they think you fuck.

All of this goes to who is allowed to do this. If you haven't put your neck on the line because of being queer for whatever reason....i don't trust you to have the right amount of caution in doing any of this. It's tricky for me to call these shots, and i do so in conversation with the community. The last thing we need is people who don't know what the risks are using outing as "just another" tool in the political armament. What makes outing a tactic with a potential for liberation is that it comes from the very people that have the most to lose. Otherwise...it would just be gay baiting. It's not that a hetero person could never do this...but that a person who is "straight" couldn't understand what it means to be targeted by society....and what it means to return fire in self-defense.

11-10-2005, 02:38 PM	#65 (permalink)
martinguerre whosoever Location: New England	two things... dissociation, and condoning: there's obviously a fine line involved in deciding how much agreement one seeks from someone before labeling them a traitor. but i fail to see how in American political life, where we have pretty well absolute freedom to make political statements...that failing to stand against something while holding a position of power isn't the same as silent affirmation. If you can do something to stop a bill and you don't....that at least says you're not opposed to it. I'm wary to draw parallels to less liberal democratic (i mean small caps on both) societies... The who: the question isn't hetero vs. non-hetero. i think the question is straight vs. queer. They are positional and perspectival labels. A person who is queer is one whose sexual/gender idenity or presentation places them in conflict with a heteronormative society (one that demands straight idenity and polices gender roles). Thus, a man who is percieved as "effeminate" might be hetero, but still be queer in that his gender idenity causes conflict with a heterosexist society. Or, a woman who is a ally to the community might be percieved through one of the classic tropes of the "dyke" or as a bitch because of her advocacy...even if she sleeps with men. It isn't who you fuck. It's who society thinks you are because of who they think you fuck. All of this goes to who is allowed to do this. If you haven't put your neck on the line because of being queer for whatever reason....i don't trust you to have the right amount of caution in doing any of this. It's tricky for me to call these shots, and i do so in conversation with the community. The last thing we need is people who don't know what the risks are using outing as "just another" tool in the political armament. What makes outing a tactic with a potential for liberation is that it comes from the very people that have the most to lose. Otherwise...it would just be gay baiting. It's not that a hetero person could never do this...but that a person who is "straight" couldn't understand what it means to be targeted by society....and what it means to return fire in self-defense. __________________ For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life. -John 3:16 Last edited by martinguerre; 11-10-2005 at 10:33 PM.. Reason: i can't parse sentences