Is Homosexual Identity Dependant on Homophobia ?

[brixtonscot]

brixtonscot do you think we've lost something, been compromised and commercialised?

Yes , to a large extent - in the “cause” of being assimilated into the conservative mainstream.
Maybe I’m a bit old , disillusioned and cynical , but that poem sums up some of my feelings
Eta , not too forget there are still some fighting for Queer Liberation for all , within a larger anti-capitalist movement

 

[krtek a houby]

Yes , to a large extent - in the “cause” of being assimilated into the conservative mainstream.
Maybe I’m a bit old , disillusioned and cynical , but that poem sums up some of my feelings

Yep, I hear you.

 

[InArduisFouette]

brixtonscot do you think we've lost something, been compromised and commercialised?

I know some people who don't really know anything Stonewall and current issues (and don't care) but I'm guessing that they are young or maybe confident that history and politics aren't worth spending too much time on.

oddly enough the kind of rhetoric we are hearing from Brixtonscot often comes from those who have been radicalised by various groups claiming thecurrent activism is 'damaging lesbian and gay lives ' and ioften ends up being aobut white gay men pulling the ladders up behind themselves. However it appears, at least at present, that they are trying to hold up a mirror and a light to that ...

 

[brixtonscot]

oddly enough the kind of rhetoric we are hearing from Brixtonscot often comes from those who have been radicalised by various groups claiming thecurrent activism is 'damaging lesbian and gay lives ' and ioften ends up being aobut white gay men pulling the ladders up behind themselves. However it appears, at least at present, that they are trying to hold up a mirror and a light to that ...

You got your crass arrogant presumptions about me wrong there , it’s not mere rhetoric , it’s my personal lived experience

 

[danny la rouge]

oddly enough the kind of rhetoric we are hearing from Brixtonscot often comes from those who have been radicalised by various groups claiming thecurrent activism is 'damaging lesbian and gay lives ' and ioften ends up being aobut white gay men pulling the ladders up behind themselves. However it appears, at least at present, that they are trying to hold up a mirror and a light to that ...

Hold up a minute. I don’t know how you got that from brixtonscot ’s posts. I’m not seeing that.

For example that poem (authorship unknown, to me at least) expresses some ideas I have pondered myself.

The first verse, for example: the plea to be accepted because we “can’t help it, we’re born this way”. What does it matter whether one’s sexuality is innate or a choice? That’s besides the point: can’t society just get used to the idea that people are gay, choice or not? Just show human beings respect and compassion. Surely that’s the standard, rather than “they can’t help it”?

And joining the armed forces. The right to be a pawn to be sacrificed at the whim of the state? Haud me back.

And the institution of marriage: sure, great, equal marriage. Fine, as far as it goes. I’m recently married myself. But it has been a central institution of patriarchy, does joining it challenge misogyny, transmisogyny, homophobia, and so on? Maybe asking to be allowed to join in doesn’t address the greater issues?

And rainbow flags on consumer products? What is that achieving? An LBGT sandwich from Markies? What is that over and above rainbow-washing?

And so on. These are reasonable questions. And don’t seem to me to indicate white gay men pulling up the ladder in any way. Quite the reverse. They’re asking why we’re shoring up the edifice, the castle itself, instead of finding ways to undermine it and topple it.

 

[weltweit]

Surely there isn't a one size fits all homosexual identity?

 

[danny la rouge]

Surely there isn't a one size fits all homosexual identity?

I don’t think anyone is arguing there is.

 

[brixtonscot]

Hold up a minute. I don’t know how you got that from brixtonscot ’s posts. I’m not seeing that.

For example that poem (authorship unknown, to me at least) expresses some ideas I have pondered myself.

The first verse, for example: the plea to be accepted because we “can’t help it, we’re born this way”. What does it matter whether one’s sexuality is innate or a choice? That’s besides the point: can’t society just get used to the idea that people are gay, choice or not? Just show human beings respect and compassion. Surely that’s the standard, rather than “they can’t help it”?

And joining the armed forces. The right to be a pawn to be sacrificed at the whim of the state? Haud me back.

And the institution of marriage: sure, great, equal marriage. Fine, as far as it goes. I’m recently married myself. But it has been a central institution of patriarchy, does joining it challenge misogyny, transmisogyny, homophobia, and so on? Maybe asking to be allowed to join in doesn’t address the greater issues?

And rainbow flags on consumer products? What is that achieving? An LBGT sandwich from Markies? What is that over and above rainbow-washing?

And so on. These are reasonable questions. And don’t seem to me to indicate white gay men pulling up the ladder in any way. Quite the reverse. They’re asking why we’re shoring up the edifice, the castle itself, instead of finding ways to undermine it and topple it.

Thanks danny la rouge , I agree and appreciate your comments
( I wrote the poem )

 

[danny la rouge]

( I wrote the poem )

It’s very good.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Thanks danny la rouge , I agree and appreciate your comments
( I wrote the poem )

I'm impressed. Really like it.

 

[PTK]

ALL OF THIS ^^^^^^ thanks hitmouse
Here’s a poem , primarily directed at the commercial gay male scene - which has become a multi-billion dollar industry - concerning the eclipse of queer liberation for ALL , to the conservative assimilation of some -

Plea Bargaining

Please

Acquit us , we can’t help ourselves

we were born this way

who everybody FINDS attractive is already fixed at birth

( isn't it.....? )

Please

accept us in the military forces of the state

to be able to kill and die in the interests

of imperialism and big business

It would be an honour

( wouldn't it..... ? )

Please

Let us be compulsive consumers in a commercial ghetto

driven by drink , drugs and disposable sex

always looking for the next fix

Image is everything

( isn't it..... ? )

Please

let us conform to exclusive bottom/top roles

so we can imitate stereotypes

we were born that way too

( weren't we..... ? )

Please

Allow us to participate in the historically oppressive institution of matrimony

which became the subservience of woman as mother

- after she has "been given away" by one man , her father

to another man , her husband -

So we can pass as equally“normal”

( can't we.... ? )

Please , Please , Hear our Pleas

Yes, once upon a time the gay liberation (as it was called) was seen to be questioning the capitalist order.

 

[brixtonscot]

Yes, once upon a time the gay liberation (as it was called) was seen to be questioning the capitalist order.

Very true , before it was eclipsed by neoliberal middle class opportunist individualistic assimilationist identitarians
( excuse the “rhetoric” )

 

[danny la rouge]

Very true , before it was eclipsed by neoliberal middle class opportunist individualistic assimilationist identitarians
( excuse the “rhetoric” )

I think I agree.

It’s a sentence dense with terms. But if you mean that radical spaces were at one time - as society as a whole was - dominated by patriarchal paternalism which was inattentive to women’s voices, gay voices, gender queer voices, black voices, and so on. But that the initial justified and necessary correctives against this were later co-opted by liberals (in the sense of those who place individualism, individual morality, and individual interests ahead of collectivism, structural analysis and universal values) and eventually by the neoliberal elite (as evidenced by the fact that it was a Tory government, for example, which introduced equal marriage in Westminster), if that’s what you mean, then I agree.

 

[InArduisFouette]

I think I agree.

It’s a sentence dense with terms. But if you mean that radical spaces were at one time - as society as a whole was - dominated by patriarchal paternalism which was inattentive to women’s voices, gay voices, gender queer voices, black voices, and so on. But that the initial justified and necessary correctives against this were later co-opted by liberals (in the sense of those who place individualism, individual morality, and individual interests ahead of collectivism, structural analysis and universal values) and eventually by the neoliberal elite (as evidenced by the fact that it was a Tory government, for example, which introduced equal marriage in Westminster), if that’s what you mean, then I agree.

and all too often women, none binary, bi and pansexual , Aro +Ace , PoC, voices find the 'queer' discourse and agenda is set by white middle class men ( and a certain subset of white Femme presenting lesbians) who seem to want to play respectability politics to maintain their friendships and inside tracks with the liberals and neoliberals

 

[danny la rouge]

and all too often women, none binary, bi and pansexual , Aro +Ace , PoC, voices find the 'queer' discourse and agenda is set by white middle class men ( and a certain subset of white Femme presenting lesbians) who seem to want to play resactability politics to maintain their friendships and inside tracks with the liberals and neoliberals

Indeed.

 

[brixtonscot]

I think I agree.

It’s a sentence dense with terms. But if you mean that radical spaces were at one time - as society as a whole was - dominated by patriarchal paternalism which was inattentive to women’s voices, gay voices, gender queer voices, black voices, and so on. But that the initial justified and necessary correctives against this were later co-opted by liberals (in the sense of those who place individualism, individual morality, and individual interests ahead of collectivism, structural analysis and universal values) and eventually by the neoliberal elite (as evidenced by the fact that it was a Tory government, for example, which introduced equal marriage in Westminster), if that’s what you mean, then I agree.

Indeed

 

[krtek a houby]

Surely there isn't a one size fits all homosexual identity?

Oooh, matron!

 

[brixtonscot]

Oooh, matron!

Penetrate the patriarchy
Or
Free your ass
And your mind will follow… ?
( and/or vice versa )

 

[brixtonscot]

Penetrate the patriarchy
Or
Free your ass
And your mind will follow… ?
( and/or vice versa )

On a more serious note , I think that the fear of actual or metaphorical penetration of hegemonic masculinity is a significant factor in male homophobia -

“It is precisely men's fearful imagining of themselves
as “object" of another man's desire, their horror of the supposed
“passivity" of being 'penetrated", that so threatens the resolute
identifications of straight men.”
Lynne Segal

( Not withstanding that some straight identified men are into “pegging”
And some gay identified men are not into being penetrated )

 

[skyscraper101]

IF there was no homophobia
would there be a need to forge an identity
based on specific sexual preferences of sex/gender ?

Yes. For no other reason than it's helpful when you're in a minority to do so. And gay people have always been a minority.

It's no different to say forging an identity when you're into a specific type of music. Grunge, goth, new-romantic etc. All the identity bearers such as e.g. fashion/hair were just markers to forge an identity. It wasn't born out of oppression just preference to identify as 'not the mainstream'. Of course many people who liked that stuff saw no need either. As many gay people see no need to forge an identity. Some just like it.

 

[brixtonscot]

Yes. For no other reason than it's helpful when you're in a minority to do so. And gay people have always been a minority.

It's no different to say forging an identity when you're into a specific type of music. Grunge, goth, new-romantic etc. All the identity bearers such as e.g. fashion/hair were just markers to forge an identity. It wasn't born out of oppression just preference to identify as 'not the mainstream'. Of course many people who liked that stuff saw no need either. As many gay people see no need to forge an identity. Some just like it.

I used the word forge for its more than one meaning - one of which is forgery.

To stretch the discussion of identities wider , could comparisons be made to the forge(ry) of national identities ?
which have been forged in the interests of ruling classes.

Yet , so many are willing to kill and die for these ruling class made borders.

( I realise there is/was a long thread on Identity Politics , which this could duplicate )

 

[skyscraper101]

I used the word forge for its more than one meaning - one of which is forgery.

To stretch the discussion of identities wider , could comparisons be made to the forge(ry) of national identities ?
which have been forged in the interests of ruling classes.

Yet , so many are willing to kill and die for these ruling class made borders.

( I realise there is/was a long thread on Identity Politics , which this could duplicate )

Ok fine but I wasn't referring to it in that context. I think those comparisons are tenuous but not something I've given much thought to either.

 

[brixtonscot]

To try and roughly summarise , I think the point that I’m trying to make is that the categorisation of male same sex behaviour was initially created as a perceived inferior “other” to the heterosexual establishment. Prior to that , people just had sex with men and/or women without specific categorisations.

Then as a consequence of that , those who had been “othered” , adopted that created identity in response , in order to oppose that homophobic prejudice collectively - understandably so.
Nevertheless , it is not some essential inherent identity in and of itself .
What gay activist & historian , one time member of Gay Left Collective , Jeffrey Weeks referred to as a “necessary fiction”.

In my opinion , that has been lost in what has become to be the predominant era of essentialist identity politics.
One of the original aims of the Gay Liberation Front was for the sexual liberation of EVERYBODY.

Similarity with oppressed racial identities in response to racism.
Racism - the categorisation of people by physical characteristics - eg. to “justify” slavery - came first ,
which created those identities of “races” as a consequence.

National identities differ in some ways , but are similar in that they are not essential in and of themselves.
They have been created by the forging of national borders by ruling classes.

Just to add that at the beginning of the previous Identity Politics thread on here ,
I had been generally in favour of my understanding of what “identity politics” was….
- going back to the 1970’s - support for the autonomous self-activity of oppressed groups within the working class ,
as part of a wider progressive anti-capitalist movement -
ie. as a means to an end with the eventual aim of overthrowing capitalism.( if only )

Currently reading the recently published book on Big Flame, reminded me how we attempted to put that theory in to practice…..possibly among the first within the organised Left in England.

That thread helped me realise that the prioritisation of “(essentialist) identity (minus the) politics” had become something very different over the ensuing decades
- ie. as an end in itself of being assimilated into capitalism.

It took me a while to get “my head round that” at first….