In one of the readings we were assigned by Don Sabo, "Masculinities and Men's Health", the health of men is discussed, both physical and mental. It is about age, color and sexuality of men, and how those things affect overall health. Something that I found interesting was the small part about the mental health of gay and bisexual men. It says that the social responses of being gay or bisexual can impact the health of these men and may lead to emotional confusion and even suicide. They have to deal with homophobia everywhere, even in the healthcare field, which can cause health problems not only mentally, but also physically. They can even lose health insurance, according to the article, if their homosexuality is known.
The part of this article I chose to do more research about is the emotional damage being gay has on young men, specifically college-aged. An article I found on ABC news stated,
"According to a recently released study by Campus Pride on how gay students are treated in higher education, gay students experienced significantly greater harassment and discrimination, and they were more likely to seriously consider leaving school because of it."
I knew that it was a big problem among people my age, but I didn't know how bad it has become. The article I read was about a young man who ended his life after his roommate put a video of him having sex with another man on the internet. It was the fifth gay suicide in three weeks, according the the article. It described the situations on all of the cases, and stated that almost none of the bullies were being charged with any sort of crime.
In the article it discussed how, as a society, we could make homosexuality more acceptable. A big part was to have openly gay celebrities discuss it to let everyone know homophobia is not okay. Celebrities discussing it would open up the topic to the people who really need to hear it.
As I said before, I knew gays being bullied was a problem, but I didn't realize the real effect it had. I had no idea there were so many suicides occurring because of it. I think it is awful it is such an epidemic and nothing is being done about. I have heard there are support groups and clubs for LGBT, but it seems like that is obviously not enough. There needs to be actual punishment for bullying, especially if that bullying ends in injury or suicide. It is disgusting to me that these bullies in the article were not charged when they clearly had a large impact in the suicide.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/gay-teen-suicide-sparks-debate/story?id=11788128#.T-vKZBdfEpU
Elizabeth Kramer
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Body Image vs TV Image
by Jeff Cline
Continuing this weeks discussion questions and one of my fellow bloggers i have decided to comment and write more about body image and the toll it takes on people. I found this article by Yale Daily News. It is an article discussing the conversations between a panel of professors, sexual educators, and the cheif of Health at Yale University. This article talks about how men and women are categorized based on how we are taught. We are taught that men have bodies that do things and that women are displayed. Women are looked at as objects of display and used for the sexual desire of others while men are considered the machines that are expected to perform.
These images that are taught to everyone has caused women and men to feel the need to meet those requirements to be accepted. A woman who does not see herself as a sexual desire to other will more likely have problems with their bodily image. This is what leads to eating disorders and even weight gain. The article also talked about what has led to the images everyone expects. Movies and TV were labeled as the biggest influence on stereotypes we get for men and women. One of the professors stated that if they are going to put sex on TV then they need to make it "ugly and messy and funny" because that is what it really is. The images that TV puts out there has coused people to expect a perfect romance and everything to go as planned. People feel they need to look that way or do things a certain way to be accepted. The images on TV should not be condsidered the perfect image. Yale has students who are raising awareness of mental disorders caused by body image and are hoping to help people to see life how they live it and not how TV lives it.
http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2012/feb/07/panel-discusses-body-image-sex/
Continuing this weeks discussion questions and one of my fellow bloggers i have decided to comment and write more about body image and the toll it takes on people. I found this article by Yale Daily News. It is an article discussing the conversations between a panel of professors, sexual educators, and the cheif of Health at Yale University. This article talks about how men and women are categorized based on how we are taught. We are taught that men have bodies that do things and that women are displayed. Women are looked at as objects of display and used for the sexual desire of others while men are considered the machines that are expected to perform.
These images that are taught to everyone has caused women and men to feel the need to meet those requirements to be accepted. A woman who does not see herself as a sexual desire to other will more likely have problems with their bodily image. This is what leads to eating disorders and even weight gain. The article also talked about what has led to the images everyone expects. Movies and TV were labeled as the biggest influence on stereotypes we get for men and women. One of the professors stated that if they are going to put sex on TV then they need to make it "ugly and messy and funny" because that is what it really is. The images that TV puts out there has coused people to expect a perfect romance and everything to go as planned. People feel they need to look that way or do things a certain way to be accepted. The images on TV should not be condsidered the perfect image. Yale has students who are raising awareness of mental disorders caused by body image and are hoping to help people to see life how they live it and not how TV lives it.
http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2012/feb/07/panel-discusses-body-image-sex/
Secondary Sex Characteristics and Societal Pressures
by Jamin Shih
Secondary sex characteristics (like body or facial hair, the development of breasts, and voice changes) occur to demonstrate an individual's sexual maturity. They are a marker of gender in many cases and are a relatively clear indicator of pubescent state. However, an increasing trend in American society is the general distaste for secondary sex characteristics and this does not match historical attitudes.
This article from a column briefly talks about how expectations have changed for women about what amount of body hair is acceptable. Photographs from years past lack the obsession with hairlessness in women that characterizes sexuality today. Indeed, the same can be applied to men (although it can be acceptable for men to be hairy, there is an increasing trend in finding male body hair repulsive). In older forms of media, male body hair is seen as a positive trait, one that denotes age or manliness. Nowadays, many male celebrities wax or shave for blockbuster movies.
This scholarly article (which is over 300 pages, and thus I regrettably lack the time to read completely) has a handful of very helpful graphs that demonstrate this cultural attitude and the distaste for body hair. The graphs (on pages 250 - 302) show that many university students feel that to be beautiful is to be relatively hairless.
A reason for this may be rooted in the recent obsession with youth in American society. The idea that getting older is not a good thing, the mass marketing of age-reducing wrinkle creams and hair dye to cover gray hairs work in tandem with the almost anti-pubescent nature of mass-shaving and waxing. Combined with the fashion trend of models lacking much breast development (with the exception of lingerie models), it is interesting to question what forces are at work at stigmatizing or downplaying secondary sex characteristics and why.
Secondary sex characteristics (like body or facial hair, the development of breasts, and voice changes) occur to demonstrate an individual's sexual maturity. They are a marker of gender in many cases and are a relatively clear indicator of pubescent state. However, an increasing trend in American society is the general distaste for secondary sex characteristics and this does not match historical attitudes.
This article from a column briefly talks about how expectations have changed for women about what amount of body hair is acceptable. Photographs from years past lack the obsession with hairlessness in women that characterizes sexuality today. Indeed, the same can be applied to men (although it can be acceptable for men to be hairy, there is an increasing trend in finding male body hair repulsive). In older forms of media, male body hair is seen as a positive trait, one that denotes age or manliness. Nowadays, many male celebrities wax or shave for blockbuster movies.
This scholarly article (which is over 300 pages, and thus I regrettably lack the time to read completely) has a handful of very helpful graphs that demonstrate this cultural attitude and the distaste for body hair. The graphs (on pages 250 - 302) show that many university students feel that to be beautiful is to be relatively hairless.
A reason for this may be rooted in the recent obsession with youth in American society. The idea that getting older is not a good thing, the mass marketing of age-reducing wrinkle creams and hair dye to cover gray hairs work in tandem with the almost anti-pubescent nature of mass-shaving and waxing. Combined with the fashion trend of models lacking much breast development (with the exception of lingerie models), it is interesting to question what forces are at work at stigmatizing or downplaying secondary sex characteristics and why.
Monday, June 25, 2012
Social Media and Body Image
One of our discussion questions for the week is about using body image to maintain power over people and if bodies are an important way of maintaining power in society. I think the body is a very important way to maintain power. Attractiveness is important in daily life, as we have seen in previous lessons, and in the last discussion board when we listed five things we do to make ourselves more attractive everyday. Obviously people care about how they look if they are willing to go to such great lengths to make themselves better looking. People who are more attractive have more power over others because others want to emulate them, have the attractive person like them, or simply just be associated with them. A good body image is necessary to go far in life and to make people like you.
A big part of today's society is social media, which I've always thought has a lot to do with body image, but never have seen any proof. Facebook is arguably the biggest social media website. With all of the pictures, statuses, and comments people post, it is no wonder that facebook has such a large effect on its users. People naturally want to project the good things going on in their lives to show off, and facebook is the easiest way to do that. In the summer girls post pictures in tiny bikinis, and men show off their six-pack they have been working on all summer. People only show the good things going on, not the bad, so naturally, people compare themselves to how well they think everyone else is doing. The problem is, when you only compare yourself to other's good things, you're in for some negatives. In The Baltimore Sun, they posted a study that said that 75% of facebook users were unhappy with their body. Also, 51% said facebook made them more conscious about their weight. Again, this is no surprise with all the pictures people put up of themselves, but it definitely creates a bias. The "normal" looking people don't put up pictures, so no one is comparing themselves to what they should be. This goes for media in general, but since facebook is such a big deal in today's world, it makes the biggest difference. Considering how important body image is for success, I think it is very sad that social media can have such a large effect.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-03-28/health/bal-poh-facebook-and-poor-body-image_1_body-image-facebook-users-social-networking-sites
Elizabeth Kramer
A big part of today's society is social media, which I've always thought has a lot to do with body image, but never have seen any proof. Facebook is arguably the biggest social media website. With all of the pictures, statuses, and comments people post, it is no wonder that facebook has such a large effect on its users. People naturally want to project the good things going on in their lives to show off, and facebook is the easiest way to do that. In the summer girls post pictures in tiny bikinis, and men show off their six-pack they have been working on all summer. People only show the good things going on, not the bad, so naturally, people compare themselves to how well they think everyone else is doing. The problem is, when you only compare yourself to other's good things, you're in for some negatives. In The Baltimore Sun, they posted a study that said that 75% of facebook users were unhappy with their body. Also, 51% said facebook made them more conscious about their weight. Again, this is no surprise with all the pictures people put up of themselves, but it definitely creates a bias. The "normal" looking people don't put up pictures, so no one is comparing themselves to what they should be. This goes for media in general, but since facebook is such a big deal in today's world, it makes the biggest difference. Considering how important body image is for success, I think it is very sad that social media can have such a large effect.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-03-28/health/bal-poh-facebook-and-poor-body-image_1_body-image-facebook-users-social-networking-sites
Elizabeth Kramer
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Sexual Division of Jobs and Chores for Adolescents and Young Adults
by Jamin Shih
This topic has always interested me because I've felt its effects first hands. The majority of, if not all, chores and jobs are gendered. That is, it has been decided by our society that they are either a "man's job" or a "woman's job" and this has implications both in the home and on the unofficial job market. As many adolescents grow into their teenage years, they'll search for jobs. However, if their job interests do not line up with the genderedness of the jobs, then they may have a difficult time finding one.
There was an article that I read back when I was a child about how girls were rarely hired for mowing the lawn or shoveling snow whereas boys were rarely hired to babysit or watch pets. This hurts both genders because they are limited to jobs that society tells them are appropriate- similarly to some aspects of the adult job market.
This translates to chores as well. Young girls are instructed to do such chores as mop the floor, help cook dinner, and wash the dishes whereas young boys are told to mow the lawn, take out the trash, and shovel the snow. While both boys and girls are generally doing the same number of jobs, it is important to look at the time commitment that creates an inequality between the two.
"Girls'" chores are those that must be done everyday. Sometimes even multiple times per day! Boys chores are often weekly events. Thus, boys tend to do fewer hours of chores per week than girls. This is again due to the genderedness of jobs. Boys who want to babysit [or like to wash dishes] will be hard-pressed to find jobs that fit that just as girls who prefer physical labor like mowing the lawn.
Unfortunately, I could not find the academic article I was referring to, but I found an article that has roughly the same information and quotes from the one I read a while ago. This can be found by clicking here.
This topic has always interested me because I've felt its effects first hands. The majority of, if not all, chores and jobs are gendered. That is, it has been decided by our society that they are either a "man's job" or a "woman's job" and this has implications both in the home and on the unofficial job market. As many adolescents grow into their teenage years, they'll search for jobs. However, if their job interests do not line up with the genderedness of the jobs, then they may have a difficult time finding one.
There was an article that I read back when I was a child about how girls were rarely hired for mowing the lawn or shoveling snow whereas boys were rarely hired to babysit or watch pets. This hurts both genders because they are limited to jobs that society tells them are appropriate- similarly to some aspects of the adult job market.
This translates to chores as well. Young girls are instructed to do such chores as mop the floor, help cook dinner, and wash the dishes whereas young boys are told to mow the lawn, take out the trash, and shovel the snow. While both boys and girls are generally doing the same number of jobs, it is important to look at the time commitment that creates an inequality between the two.
"Girls'" chores are those that must be done everyday. Sometimes even multiple times per day! Boys chores are often weekly events. Thus, boys tend to do fewer hours of chores per week than girls. This is again due to the genderedness of jobs. Boys who want to babysit [or like to wash dishes] will be hard-pressed to find jobs that fit that just as girls who prefer physical labor like mowing the lawn.
Unfortunately, I could not find the academic article I was referring to, but I found an article that has roughly the same information and quotes from the one I read a while ago. This can be found by clicking here.
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Homosexual Boy Scouts? What About Gay Girl Scouts???
This week's reading made me think a lot about the inequalities between men and women I see everyday. I mostly thought about myself and other people I know who either follow the norm or who don't, and how they are treated differently. Something I never really thought of was the gay community and how I have seen in the past that gay men and lesbian women are treated differently. Although neither are widely accepted, I have definitely seen that more lesbians are accepted than gay men, which made me want to do a little more research on that topic. Although not directly related to the topic, I found a letter to the editor for the LA Times about the Boy Scouts being allowed to involve gay leaders and members. Thus far, it has not been allowed to have gay members.
Besides the obvious importance of this article, I thought it was very interesting that there is nothing similar for Girl Scouts. There has been nothing in the news (to my knowledge) about anything concerning lesbians in Girl Scouts, and if there has, it definitely hasn't gotten the same amount of coverage. Boy Scouts are outdoorsy, manly, and like to do "manly" things, which is why I would assume gays, who would, according to the stereotype, not be those things, wouldn't be allowed in. The girl scouts are about being caring and helping others, which is I would think lesbians would be more accepted in that group than gays in Boy Scouts.
Again, my thoughts on this topic don't directly relate to this article, but it has bothered me that gay women seem to be more accepted than men, and the idea of this article demonstrated my thoughts. A woman was involved in this, but not about Girl Scouts, just about wanting to help her son. It shows inequality for men, specifically gay men. The Boy Scouts, as a whole, is meant to create "principled young men", according to the article, but all this is teaching them is inequality for certain men. A principled young man does not have to be straight, like the outdoors, or be manly. The Girl Scouts was made to do the same thing; make well-rounded women, and yet, lesbians are allowed to be involved. The difference in the gender treatment on this topic definitely caught my attention, and I wish there was more about it.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
The Gender behind HIV/AIDS
by Jeff Cline
So i finally figured out how to get on to this blog here. I am not the most technologically person! So hello to my three classmates who will be participating in this blog. I was reading through regular news articles online and came upon and article that had to do with HIV/AIDS. However, the article was not only about this world wide disease but how it is viewed by men and women. The focus of women and HIV/AIDS has grown to be main attention of this disease. Men are still a big part of the disease but the main attention is on the women and how it affects them.
As i read this i began to think why is the attention more on women. And in my head i began to think that maybe it is because of the stereotype that men have related to sex. Men are considered the dominant person and the one in control. So by that definition a man is the one who decides to be "stupid" and spread this disease to innocent women. A woman is considered the one victimized by the acts of a man. And in some cases i would agree this is the truth and men should take more responsibility but i do not think that it only pertains to women being victims. A man or woman who does not take into consideration their well being and allows themselves to infect another person is the criminal.
A woman and man are both just as vulnerable in this situation. I do not agree that a man should be put on the side of criminal just because of the definition of masculinity. A masculine man is dominant and in control but in the sense of a HIV/AIDS a man should not be automatically considered the criminal. And the woman should not be considered the vulnerable innocent female.
I thought this article was very interesting considering that the focus of this disease truly has come from the stereotypes of men being in control and the women being innocent victims. Hope you guys have some comments or thoughts.
I hope this is how this is supposed to work!
Jeff Cline
So i finally figured out how to get on to this blog here. I am not the most technologically person! So hello to my three classmates who will be participating in this blog. I was reading through regular news articles online and came upon and article that had to do with HIV/AIDS. However, the article was not only about this world wide disease but how it is viewed by men and women. The focus of women and HIV/AIDS has grown to be main attention of this disease. Men are still a big part of the disease but the main attention is on the women and how it affects them.
As i read this i began to think why is the attention more on women. And in my head i began to think that maybe it is because of the stereotype that men have related to sex. Men are considered the dominant person and the one in control. So by that definition a man is the one who decides to be "stupid" and spread this disease to innocent women. A woman is considered the one victimized by the acts of a man. And in some cases i would agree this is the truth and men should take more responsibility but i do not think that it only pertains to women being victims. A man or woman who does not take into consideration their well being and allows themselves to infect another person is the criminal.
A woman and man are both just as vulnerable in this situation. I do not agree that a man should be put on the side of criminal just because of the definition of masculinity. A masculine man is dominant and in control but in the sense of a HIV/AIDS a man should not be automatically considered the criminal. And the woman should not be considered the vulnerable innocent female.
I thought this article was very interesting considering that the focus of this disease truly has come from the stereotypes of men being in control and the women being innocent victims. Hope you guys have some comments or thoughts.
I hope this is how this is supposed to work!
Jeff Cline
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Assimilation of Homosexuals in the Bay Area
by Jamin Shih
Lots of media attention has been garnered towards the lives and tribulations of homosexual youth in various more conservative areas of the United States as well as more liberal cities such as New York and San Francisco. However, the discussion generally ignores the sizable population of homosexual youth that do not grow up in one of these two extremes. While the presumed gay-friendly metropolises seem to create a nice and simple dichotomy with the presumed anti-gay fields in the Midwest, suburbs across America have a growing and largely invisible problem regarding the differences between public opinion and private opinion, that is the problem of how young homosexuals must "do sexuality" in the public and private quarters.
Using experience and research in the relatively bustling suburb in northern California that I've spent the last five years in, I've found a distinct disconnect between how young homosexuals in the area feel they must act at first to gain support as a newly openly gay individual and how they later feel is appropriate. For some background on the area, San Paolo [dubbed name] is a suburb in the Bay Area relatively close to San Francisco. It is generally more open and tolerant than some other areas that I have lived in, perhaps due to its proximity to such a progressive city. Despite this, there is a significant difference between the tolerance and acceptance that high schools in the area claim to perpetuate and the behaviors of high schoolers.
However, I do not claim that this is the experience of all young homosexuals in the country, or even of all young homosexuals in the community of which I studied. However, there is a significant population of individuals who have followed this path or feel this way, and thus their claims deserved to be mentioned.
The Westboro Baptist Church came to protest at the gates of a school in 2011 and the faculty and students rallied together in purple to show support for the "homosexual community" with signs and chants. However, this spirit rally was relegated to within the school, preventing any actual contact with the church. In addition, on the annual Day of Silence, in which LGBT individuals and their supporters don black tape to show support to the cause, I have witnessed several individuals either ripping down fliers advertising the event or communicating a desire to rip the tape off of those participating. In addition, an LGBT individual that I spoke to expressed frustration that some teachers would penalize participating students under the pretense that it interfered with class time.
Thus, while the external culture seems overwhelmingly supportive and tolerant as seen by the spirit rallies and general atmosphere on a good day, it hides the same prejudices that characterize homophobic hegemonic masculinity elsewhere in the country.
This disconnect can be extremely confusing for homosexual youth growing up in the area. The school does sport a Gay-Straight Alliance as well as teachers displaying a "Safe Space" sign outside their doors to signify that LGBT individuals should not feel threatened. Yet, school officials can only do so much in preventing the bullying, verbal or physical, that permeates the lives of individuals who fall into the gender transgression zone.
The first inclination of many newly out homosexuals is to envelope themselves in "pride". Being so close to San Francisco and the ideals of complete tolerance makes some individuals feel that they must make it "official", so to speak, taking their new self-identities to Facebook, where previously those aspects of their lives were fairly invisible online. Common actions include "coming out" on Facebook statuses, generally in an aggressive way (I find it fairly common to see such statuses include sentences similar to "if you don't like it, you weren't my friend anyway" or "if you hate now, then fuck you"), changing the "Interested in" section on Facebook to the appropriate same-sex, or editing the online biography. It is interesting to note that these changes often invoke homosexual stereotypes (one biography described a love for certain stereotypically homosexual hobbies followed by "what gay doesn't [like them] lol").
However, this attitude changes for many individuals when they realize that the community's outer facade may not match the realities of people's attitudes. Individuals have complained of actually losing friends or occasionally being distanced from friend's parents. Several individuals I spoke to had difficulties with their parents that may not have been predicted before "coming out". This often leads to a desire to assimilate, or return to what the status quo once was. If not returning to a heternormative identity (as at least one individual I spoke to did), emphasizing normalcy or a distaste for being tokenized.
What were once individuals that felt that they needed to be "out and proud" about their sexual identities become individuals who may become annoyed by both opponents and supporters alike. Indeed, my last count had the schools' Gay-Straight Alliance filled with significantly more heterosexual girls than homosexuals, bisexuals, or transgender individuals combined. While opponents' opinions and nuisances to LGBT individuals are relatively obvious, it is the occasional feelings of animosity towards supporters that is perhaps most surprising. A few individuals have complained of being seen only as members of their sexual identity or their hobbies judged based on how well they lined up with gay stereotypes. Increasingly, supporters may not realize these statements can be construed as offensive to individuals that are no longer "out and proud" but simply "out".
The disconnect between public and private attitudes to homosexuality in suburbs can be extremely jarring to young homosexuals trying to find their place in society. The transition between being fully closeted to "out and proud" to just simply "out" is one that not all individuals pass through, but it is an experience that a sizable population do. It is not only the struggle within an individual that is most difficult during the process of "coming out", it is the constant struggle with societal labels of masculinity and femininity and the constant seeking of approval from both opponents and supporters alike. Despite not being at either one of the perceived extremes, liberal metropolises or conservative countrysides, young homosexuals in quiet suburbs can face many of the same challenges as other homosexuals in perhaps a unique way.
Lots of media attention has been garnered towards the lives and tribulations of homosexual youth in various more conservative areas of the United States as well as more liberal cities such as New York and San Francisco. However, the discussion generally ignores the sizable population of homosexual youth that do not grow up in one of these two extremes. While the presumed gay-friendly metropolises seem to create a nice and simple dichotomy with the presumed anti-gay fields in the Midwest, suburbs across America have a growing and largely invisible problem regarding the differences between public opinion and private opinion, that is the problem of how young homosexuals must "do sexuality" in the public and private quarters.
Using experience and research in the relatively bustling suburb in northern California that I've spent the last five years in, I've found a distinct disconnect between how young homosexuals in the area feel they must act at first to gain support as a newly openly gay individual and how they later feel is appropriate. For some background on the area, San Paolo [dubbed name] is a suburb in the Bay Area relatively close to San Francisco. It is generally more open and tolerant than some other areas that I have lived in, perhaps due to its proximity to such a progressive city. Despite this, there is a significant difference between the tolerance and acceptance that high schools in the area claim to perpetuate and the behaviors of high schoolers.
However, I do not claim that this is the experience of all young homosexuals in the country, or even of all young homosexuals in the community of which I studied. However, there is a significant population of individuals who have followed this path or feel this way, and thus their claims deserved to be mentioned.
The Westboro Baptist Church came to protest at the gates of a school in 2011 and the faculty and students rallied together in purple to show support for the "homosexual community" with signs and chants. However, this spirit rally was relegated to within the school, preventing any actual contact with the church. In addition, on the annual Day of Silence, in which LGBT individuals and their supporters don black tape to show support to the cause, I have witnessed several individuals either ripping down fliers advertising the event or communicating a desire to rip the tape off of those participating. In addition, an LGBT individual that I spoke to expressed frustration that some teachers would penalize participating students under the pretense that it interfered with class time.
Thus, while the external culture seems overwhelmingly supportive and tolerant as seen by the spirit rallies and general atmosphere on a good day, it hides the same prejudices that characterize homophobic hegemonic masculinity elsewhere in the country.
This disconnect can be extremely confusing for homosexual youth growing up in the area. The school does sport a Gay-Straight Alliance as well as teachers displaying a "Safe Space" sign outside their doors to signify that LGBT individuals should not feel threatened. Yet, school officials can only do so much in preventing the bullying, verbal or physical, that permeates the lives of individuals who fall into the gender transgression zone.
The first inclination of many newly out homosexuals is to envelope themselves in "pride". Being so close to San Francisco and the ideals of complete tolerance makes some individuals feel that they must make it "official", so to speak, taking their new self-identities to Facebook, where previously those aspects of their lives were fairly invisible online. Common actions include "coming out" on Facebook statuses, generally in an aggressive way (I find it fairly common to see such statuses include sentences similar to "if you don't like it, you weren't my friend anyway" or "if you hate now, then fuck you"), changing the "Interested in" section on Facebook to the appropriate same-sex, or editing the online biography. It is interesting to note that these changes often invoke homosexual stereotypes (one biography described a love for certain stereotypically homosexual hobbies followed by "what gay doesn't [like them] lol").
However, this attitude changes for many individuals when they realize that the community's outer facade may not match the realities of people's attitudes. Individuals have complained of actually losing friends or occasionally being distanced from friend's parents. Several individuals I spoke to had difficulties with their parents that may not have been predicted before "coming out". This often leads to a desire to assimilate, or return to what the status quo once was. If not returning to a heternormative identity (as at least one individual I spoke to did), emphasizing normalcy or a distaste for being tokenized.
What were once individuals that felt that they needed to be "out and proud" about their sexual identities become individuals who may become annoyed by both opponents and supporters alike. Indeed, my last count had the schools' Gay-Straight Alliance filled with significantly more heterosexual girls than homosexuals, bisexuals, or transgender individuals combined. While opponents' opinions and nuisances to LGBT individuals are relatively obvious, it is the occasional feelings of animosity towards supporters that is perhaps most surprising. A few individuals have complained of being seen only as members of their sexual identity or their hobbies judged based on how well they lined up with gay stereotypes. Increasingly, supporters may not realize these statements can be construed as offensive to individuals that are no longer "out and proud" but simply "out".
The disconnect between public and private attitudes to homosexuality in suburbs can be extremely jarring to young homosexuals trying to find their place in society. The transition between being fully closeted to "out and proud" to just simply "out" is one that not all individuals pass through, but it is an experience that a sizable population do. It is not only the struggle within an individual that is most difficult during the process of "coming out", it is the constant struggle with societal labels of masculinity and femininity and the constant seeking of approval from both opponents and supporters alike. Despite not being at either one of the perceived extremes, liberal metropolises or conservative countrysides, young homosexuals in quiet suburbs can face many of the same challenges as other homosexuals in perhaps a unique way.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)