Friday, January 20, 2012

Tricky.

Do you notice a pattern on Youtube or basically, anywhere in the Internet that allows readers and users to comment? We are bound to see words like 'gay' and 'fag' in the comments when readers disagree with each other. But you will never see words like 'nigger' or 'slant-eyed asswipe' because you will be bombarded with one word. Racist. I don't remember being informed that sexual slurs are accepted as normal while racial slurs are a taboo and shouldn't be used. Or maybe, my note got lost in between the stacks of Christmas cards the postmen throws out when they couldn't deliver it on time.

I'm not sure when sexual slurs started their rounds as words to insult but as always, being a person who believes in human rights, I do not support this shit. I guess, one of the reasons why the society don't choose racial slurs as an insult because we were born that way. We are born into a Chinese/Indian/White/Black family and it can't be an insult because you didn't choose to be born into that particular ethnic. It's not your freedom to choose which family you would like to live with for the rest of your lives because well, you just can't. So, I guess that's why people don't (or rarely) use racial or ethnic slurs because there is nothing to insult about. It's not your doing that you ended up with a Malay family. On the other hand, the choice of your sexuality is your decision. You can be either be straight, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual - whatever. It's all up to you when you start learning about yourself.

See, no one states that being straight is normal. You were born a male or a female but your sexual preference is all up to you. No one should tell you that a guy liking a girl is normal or that a guy having interest in another guy is unnatural. In fact, it's not even stated in any Rule Book Of Life that anything besides heterosexuality is the wrong way. So, I am disgusted to read comments that insult others with sexual slurs. By using those words as an insult, you're already imposing your superiority on homosexuals and bisexuals. You use those words as an insult because you do not like the way they are. You undermine them because of your perception that everyone is born straight and whoever who isn't, deserves to be looked down. Because they are not following the 'order of nature'.

I believe that homosexuals, bisexuals, etc deserves to be respected because they are basically as fucking human as you and anybody else. They should be allowed to decide who suits them best, regardless of gender. Cliched as it may sound but love is blind. Who are you to tell them that they should be attracted to the opposite sex? You have no right to tell them the way they should live because no homosexual goes around telling heterosexuals that they are doing it wrong. It's all about the matter of perception. The perception that being heterosexual is the right thing. It is just the same thing as people telling you that being thin is attractive. They are telling you who you should be copulating with and that even if you're a homosexual, it's okay to live in misery with the opposite sex for the rest of your life because that's what the society expects of you.

I'm not sure if I'm making sense right now. Because I think I'm going out of point.

Right. So, yeah. Using 'faggot' itself is already a derogatory manner to homosexuals. It's rude and just plain disrespectful. It's just the same as people associating the Jews with the term 'money-minded'. And no one does that, so how is this any different for sexual slurs?

...I think I lost my train of thought. I was supposed to be approaching this subject in another manner but I can't remember what I wanted to touch on. Guh.

Basically, just stop using sexual slurs because it shows how intellectual you are (or the lack of it) and how you are more or less a complete asshole for doing so. And because no one likes it.

6 comments:

bloody awful poetry said...

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, to everything. Yes, heterosexuality is viewed as the norm, and everyone who doesn't fit into that paradigm is viewed as deviant or abnormal. You're right - there is no inherent rule of nature that says heterosexuality is the right way to go.

I don't think racial slurs have completely gone out the window ; they still exist, but in some ways slurs based on one's sexuality have overtaken them to become the Ultimate Insult, as it were. Justin Bieber is "gay", or an ugly lesbian. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is a "faggot". It's like being not-straight is the worst possible thing a person could be, or the most offensive term that anyone could lob at you.

And I think the anonymity of the Internet does not help - when there is no name attached to you, when you can hide behind an icon or an avatar, when the person you're dealing with has been reduced to a set of pixels, it's THAT much easier to be a hateful asshole, because no one can track you down and hold you accountable for the things you say online. Sometimes I think it's a good idea that some sites only give you the option of commenting through your Facebook profile.

Just one thing though - sexual orientation, as far as I know and have read, is NOT choice. It becomes a personal choice when the person decides to embrace their sexuality and "come out", or they if they decide to just hide it and pretend to lead heteronormative lives for the sake of social acceptance.

Research has yet to come up with a definite gene or hormone or anything biological that determines your sexual orientation - for all we know, it could be 100% innate in our bodies, or social influence, or some sort of combination of both. Individuals could be different. We can't deny the existence of people who might "choose" to be homosexual, etc, for the sake of experimentation, or because they are confused, and they may remain confused and/or experimenting their whole lives. But I think most gays/lesbians/bisexuals and transgenders would take offence at the notion that they chose their sexual orientation. "Born this way", remember?

http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx


"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."

bloody awful poetry said...

Nobody decides WHAT their sexual orientation is, I believe. You are attracted to whoever you are attracted to, due to whatever combination of factors it may be. I think the real choice is about whether or not to publicly validate their orientation and live that life, knowing the kind of prejudice and discrimination they will undoubtedly face.

I can only offer personal experience, and what I know of friends' experiences for now. But I certainly never had a day, or even a period of time, where I woke up and decided "I think I'll go ahead and like boys only". I just knew. Sometimes there are feelings of physical attraction or admiration for women, [which brings in a whole other topic : the idea that sexual orientation is a spectrum. Nobody is only 100% attracted to boys, or 100% to girls - there are variations and fluctuations, and it is never as simple as plain "straight" or "gay". That's a different story].

But yes. I never chose to be straight, so why do people assume LGBTQ people suddenly decided to go ahead and be "deviant" and pick "the wrong orientation" just to kick up a fuss and piss off God? Am I making sense? I sure hope I am making sense.

So yes, racial slurs hurt, but the assumption is that sexuality slurs hurt more. You cannot help the colour of the skin you were born with. You probably EQUALLY have no control over who you fall in love with.

I think this is going to be longer than your actual post, so I will stop here. But yes, this is definitely A LOT of food for thought.

Jenn said...

"In fact, it's not even stated in any Rule Book Of Life that anything besides heterosexuality is the wrong way."

Actually there is. It's the Bible.
Leviticus 20:13 says 'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.'

That and a whole lot more other verses which I'm not gonna list. The Bible is universal therefore most people abide with it. That's why homosexuals are shunned by certain cultures and a fraction of society.

I've nothing against homosexuals though. I just don't get it. If God as they say deems homosexuality as a detestable act, then why did He create it.

And I've got to agree with Vanessa. Sexual orientation isn't a choice. People grow up with certain genes and sometimes it's due to the psychological effects of their surrounding. Something about how they were brought up.

For instance, a mother wanted a daughter but had a son and so she treated him as a girl. Teaching him how to be prim and proper and gentle and all the things mothers teach their baby girls. You can't blame a guy for being more feminine than masculine because his mother wanted a daughter right? He was never given a choice.

bloody awful poetry said...

Aaah Jenn, you're bringing in the religious aspect of it already. *ponders*

As you say, if God says gay people are wrong, why did He create them? Why indeed? Frankly, I don't hold much stock by the Bible itself. It's been around for far too many centuries; edited, messed around with, added to, rephrased, reinterpreted, had entire sections removed. By PEOPLE. Not God. People. People decided how many books and Gospels should be included in it, out of the hundreds of existing documents. To say that the Bible is still 100% the word of God? No. I'm not buying that any time soon. So did God say he hated gay people? Or did society, at some point, grow to disapprove of such actions and decided to throw in some footnotes of their own? We'll never know, really. We'll never know where God stopped and humans stepped in, as far as faith-based doctrine goes.

Sue Fyenn said...

Man, I love it when people start having arguments about something like this.

First of all, sorry about the part where I exclude sexual orientation as something that is sometimes also not up to an individual. I've learnt enough Biology in Form 5 to know that sometimes, they are just born that way (Klinefelter's, XYY's). But not everyone is born with these syndromes, that's why I was talking about the majority who choose or are externally influenced.

Dudes, I completely agree with you guys. And I'm glad we're not a bunch of homophobic. Makes the world a little better.

I never wanted to bring in religion into this topic because sometimes, religion just messes with people's choices and lifestyles. Religion is a good thing but sometimes, people just misinterpret everything and just create their own versions of the Bible or al-Quran. I only believe in God and yes - if God brought them here, there must be a reason to it. And it's not our decision to decide how homosexuals or anyone else should live.

And yeah, V explained it pretty well too. "So did God say he hated gay people? Or did society, at some point, grow to disapprove of such actions and decided to throw in some footnotes of their own? We'll never know, really."

I just want people to treat each other better, regardless of sexual orientation or whatever, y'know. I just don't get how some people can treat another differently just because they're not of the same POV. Doesn't the reason "we're all humans" give weight to anything?

And people need to be more creative in using profanities because if any Internet dude uses "faggot" at me..just guh.

bloody awful poetry said...

Ah okay. Allow me to clear something up here - I have to point out that syndromes like Klinefelter's (*boom* secondary school nostalgia) have little and usually NO bearing on one's sexual orientation. The PHYSICAL characteristics you are born with typically do not influence your orientation.

Such syndromes, like you mentioned, are purely biological conditions, to do with chromosomes and hormones and what not. The man may have a much smaller-than-normal penis or testicles, and maybe even breast tissue growth. This does not automatically mean that because they have an extra female chromosome, that they will be attracted to men.

There is a HUGE difference between the body you are born with, and the desires you feel (orientation). The most macho, virile, "masculine" guy you can think of could still be attracted to men, or desire intimacy with men. The most demure, feminine woman you know could also desire other women. Am I making sense? The basic thing here is that your body, or what sexual organs you are born with, whether it's due to a syndrome or biological condition or not, DOES NOT necessarily influence your sexual orientations. The physical body is a VERY different thing from sexual desire or intimate connections in itself. You see?

Your chromosome count is NEVER an indicator of whether you are gay or lesbian or bi. It is so much more complex than that. And no, it is still usually never a matter of conscious choice. External influence, maaaybe something biological that no one has been able to pinpoint yet. But no - Klinefelter's, Turner's, and all those inherent genetic disorders are NOT THE SAME as sexual orientation. They are genetic anomalies, biological conditions, disorders. They have nothing to do with sexual orientation. That distinction is super super important. It doesn't come in a package like that.

For an example, think of transgender people. Men who inwardly identify as women and want to have sex-change to become women. It's much much much more complex that just "They want to be referred by female names and wear dresses = gay". Because these transgender people actually identify as women, they want to BE women, that is their ultimate aim. It's not even about whether they want sex with other men ; physically, mentally, emotionally, they feel like they were mistakenly put into a body with a penis instead of a vagina, and they want to fix that. That is ONE level of it. Once they have acquired the female body, who they actually have sexual desire for, is a completely different story. Some may become women and fall for men, some may fall for other women. Or even both, or neither. Their orientation is in NO WAY related to the body they had before, or the body they have now. In terms of IDENTITY, they see themselves as female. In terms of ORIENTATION, it does not matter, it's not related or dependent to the body. Do you see? They do not identify as gay - they feel that they are women.

I hope I'm making sense - I basically want to illustrate that the physical body (chromosomes, sexual organs, genetic disorders) is typically totally unrelated to sexual orientation (gay, straight, bi). Yes, no one chooses to be born with Kleinfelter's, but whether or not the person has it, is completely irrelevant. Someone with Kleinfelter's may be straight, may be gay, may be lesbian, may be bi, may be pansexual, may be asexual. The disorder itself has NO influence. That's what I really want you to understand.