Does the term, “Heterosexist,” Sound a Tad too PC?
Just received an e-mail promoting something called the 2009 Anti-Heterosexism Conference to be held this November in West Palm Beach, Florida. My first thought was that this was some kind of spoof, but then I looked at their agenda and saw that it was not.
While some of the language describing the conference sounds like PC gibberish, “The goal of the conference is to explore and begin undoing the heterosexist attitudes that exist on personal, interpersonal, institutional and cultural levels,” they do address at least one issue which merits greater attention, the “scientifically unsound” methods of “reparative” theory (you know that stuff that’s supposed to cure us of our homosexual inclinations).
Beyond that, in the panels yet to be developed (they have issue a call for “workshop presentations”), I fear that the organizers seeks to label as “heterosexist” anyone who dares suggest there is a difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality, that is, that gender does make a difference in the way we relate to one another.
I do wish our blog had a significant source of outside income so I could attend the conference and report back to y’all on its proceedings.
20 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
You know, as a grad student, you could work up an abstract and submit it. You add a conservative’s opinion to the proceedings, and get another addition to your CV. And you can see if your program will give you funding to attend the conference.
And, really, West Palm Beach doesn’t sound all that bad. http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1211
Comment by B.T.Carolus — August 20, 2009 @ 8:36 pm - August 20, 2009
I’ve never heard “heterosexist” before. But I do know that anytime I hear the word “heteronormative” I stop paying attention to everything else the person is saying.
Most people don’t give a flying squirrel how others live their lives, and will judge them on their character. If you try to tell people to change the way they do things because some others don’t do it that way, you’re just asking for trouble.
Comment by Obi-Wandreas — August 20, 2009 @ 9:22 pm - August 20, 2009
Good point, B.T., only problem is that we have fewer than 10 days to send in our proposals. They must be submitted by August 29.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — August 20, 2009 @ 9:50 pm - August 20, 2009
I think reparative therapy addresses real issues–it just doesn’t cure homosexuality. I think there are lots of men with a “broken masculinity.” I think that most homosexual men suffer from a sense of lost or broken manhood. I don’t think their sexual orientation is rooted in their broken masculinity, though. I think having a homosexual orientation leads to a life of being rejected by the male world which leads to a broken masculinity. So, reparative therapy effectively addresses broken masculinity issues and can lead to healing of that brokenness–which leaves you a stronger, more confident homosexual. And leaves a frustrated reparative therapist who thought you’d change your orientation once your masculinity issues were healed.
It’s like taking Advil to cure deafness. Advil works–it heals the headache which you thought was the source of your deafness. It’s disappointing because you’re still deaf, and you thought the Advil would help with that. But it’s not so bad–now you can handle being deaf better because you don’t have a headache anymore.
So, if you use reparative therapy to help with a sense of broken masculinity, it will work. And if you repair that broken masculinity, you’ll end up a stronger, more confident homosexual.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 20, 2009 @ 10:13 pm - August 20, 2009
I have heard the term “heterosexist” before, way back in 2006, when an acquaintance of mine used the term to disparage the viewpoints of some straight people in relation to the gay community.
Then I asked him if his comments were considered “homosexist.”
The conversation thus ended abruptly and we never spoke again.
Checkmate.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — August 20, 2009 @ 11:45 pm - August 20, 2009
Yes, I’ve heard heterosexist before–but I couldn’t tell you when. Most likely at some point in grad. school in the 1990s. But as I’ve spent most of the intervening years around or working at college campuses in one capacity or another, I could just be confused about when or where I encountered it. Anyway, I don’t think one needs to question whether or not it is “a tad too PC.” It is more than a tad!
As far as reparative therapy, I think it doesn’t do any good in most cases, but anecdotally, I think there is some evidence that some individuals have found it helpful. I would speculate that any of the so-called success stories have been people close to the middle of the Kinsey spectrum anyway, so for them it was a matter of learning not to focus on their feelings of same sex attraction or learning how to repress them so that they could focus more on the possibility of relationships with the opposite sex. Or that’s my theory at any rate. I don’t believe everyone who claims it has worked for them is necessarily lying. I just think that the people who claim it worked for them are few and far between.
Comment by Kurt — August 21, 2009 @ 12:23 am - August 21, 2009
Well, being that the conference mentions the ministry I work for in a negative light (Exodus International) … I don’t think I would be welcomed as an observer much less a presenter.
And Kurt, I never did “reparative therapy” but I have experienced a very significant change in my orientation. BUT that was never the goal. Living my life congruent with my faith was/is. I am not knockin’ reparative therapy at all either.
And I was 100% gay and ok about it … I wasn’t anywhere near the middle of the Kinsey spectrum 17 years ago.
Comment by Randy — August 21, 2009 @ 12:47 am - August 21, 2009
I wish my blog had outside income so I could attend the event, deride the attendees, tell them to quick screwing up my country and get real jobs, then hit the beach!
Comment by American Elephant — August 21, 2009 @ 2:25 am - August 21, 2009
You could ask for donations.
Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — August 21, 2009 @ 3:47 am - August 21, 2009
so I could attend the conference and report back to y’all on its proceedings.
By my heel, I care not.
I think that most homosexual men suffer from a sense of lost or broken manhood.
Dunno about you, but my manhood is just fine. Javier can vouch for me.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 21, 2009 @ 5:02 am - August 21, 2009
A conference filled with smokin’ lesbos in Palm Beach?
Nope, probably a b!tch-fest filled with poorly dressed bull dykes who haven’t seen a razor in years.
I’ll pass.
Comment by Julie Kelleher — August 21, 2009 @ 7:05 am - August 21, 2009
I think that a lot of the flamboyant, effeminate behavior associated with homosexuality is due to broken masculinity. I don’t think a lot of homosexual men experience the same level of masculine affirmation that straight men get from other men. I think straight fathers bond more strongly with straight sons and tend to turn sons they intuit are gay over to their mothers to raise. I think brothers distance themselves from homosexual brothers. And it even gets worse in school. So I think that there is a lot of broken masculinity in the homosexual community.
I believe there are differences in the sexes. I think men should be men and women should be women. I am a man who loves men–I am not a woman in a man’s body, nor am I a man with a strong feminine side. Being homosexual means I am a fully masculine man who loves fully masculine men. I think that any other expression of homosexuality is rooted in broken masculinity and toxic shame–and that’s why I think Pride/Stonewall is so destructive. It feeds the brokenness and shame rather than working to repair masculinity.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 21, 2009 @ 10:19 am - August 21, 2009
I think you’re wrong. First, what does “broken masculinity” even mean? You’re spewing psychobabble. Masculinity is a quality; either you’ve got it, or not. Not having it doesn’t make it “broken” in you, but merely absent. When look at something blue, do we say it has “broken orange-ness”? No, it doesn’t make sense. The quality of being orange is merely lacking – Not broken.
Second, I think it happens a lot of gay men are naturally feminine. And equally, a lot are not. It may have to with fetal development. Some gay men are physically feminized; others are physically hyper-masculinized. It takes all kinds to make a horse race. But trying to come up with psychological theories about certain people’s physical characteristics is stupid. And a tactic of the anti-gay.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 21, 2009 @ 11:03 am - August 21, 2009
Then, androgynous-effeminate men such as Adam Lambert and Michael Jackson – who may be gay (Lambert) or straight (Jackson) – must be a real problem for you.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 21, 2009 @ 11:06 am - August 21, 2009
this is an interesting piece on the idea of privilege that comes with heterosexism. . .
http://depths.dacheron.com/2009/08/a-question-of-privilege/comment-page-1/#comment-8
Comment by rusty — August 21, 2009 @ 1:12 pm - August 21, 2009
Ashpenaz, I’m curious. In your case, how did “reparative” “therapy” fix “broken masculinity”? Were you more feminine when you went into “therapy” and somehow became more masculine?
Also, we have different definitions of what it means to be masculine. For example, some people believe that simply by virtue of being attracted to men is “broken” masculinity. In any case, why the hostility towards men that don’t fit your definition of masculinity? Further, there are plenty of gay men who attend Pride events and/or have a different perspective of Stonewall that most would characterize of masculine or even hypermasculine.
Patrick J. Sime
Comment by Pat — August 21, 2009 @ 3:02 pm - August 21, 2009
Broken men aren’t effeminate. You can’t change being a man. But, yes, reparative therapy helped me build masculine self-esteem.
Stonewall/Pride is not about homosexual rights–it’s about sexual freedom for everyone, including freedom from gender. The men involved in that movement mostly imitate masculinity rather than embody it.
Achilles, Socrates, Richard I, Alexander, David, Lawrence of Arabia, Yukio Mishima, etc. are all men who loved men.
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 21, 2009 @ 5:36 pm - August 21, 2009
Thanks for your response, Ashpenaz. I’m trying to understand what you are saying, but you appear to be all over the place. And I’m not sure why men with broken masculinity would bother to try to imitate masculinity.
I’m glad for you that “reparative” “therapy” helped you in your self-esteem. I’m not sure why the qualifier “masculine” was necessary. You are what you are, masculine, feminine, whatever, and you want to be able to embrace what you are. Should self-esteem for homosexuals be reserved only for those who embody a certain amount of masculinity?
A large part of Stonewall/Pride, in my view, is about being able to live in a world where Achilles, Richard I, or Lawrence of Arabia, can be open about his sexuality and his love of the special man in his life, the same way a straight man is open about his sexuality and the special woman in his life.
Patrick J. Sime
Comment by Pat — August 22, 2009 @ 9:53 am - August 22, 2009
Now you’re just contradicting yourself, Ash. Contradicting what you said earlier: that effeminate homosexuals *are* men of “broken masculinity” (so-called).
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 23, 2009 @ 9:29 am - August 23, 2009
P.S. I suppose you could have a valid point in there somewhere. But it needs work. Concentrate on sweeping away the detritus of babble and self-contradictions.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 23, 2009 @ 9:33 am - August 23, 2009