From: smorine@nyx.cs.du.edu (Suzanne Morine)
Subject: Challenging Gender Roles (was 2 straight 2 B gay)
Summary: Challenging gender roles can be a useful and safe pursuit.
Keywords: sex, gender, dogma, gay rights
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 04:00:40 GMT

If you question the popular assumptions about homosexuality, logically the
next question is whether any other assumptions about sex and gender
are equally misguided.  This is often a safe and useful pursuit.  You
might approach it objectively, experientially, whatever.  It might be
best to tell critics that they should try it, too.  And I don't want to
imply that the 'gay movement' has got it all figured out, either.

'n' notice: the rest explores this in more detail.


My Amature Social Analysis
--------------------------

Gayness is like left-handedness in many ways.  In its causes (somewhat
unknown), religious/secular beliefs about it (negative judgements),
minority status (about 10% of populations), and nature (a personal
preference).

I think the big difference is that the existence of homosexuality
makes people look at sex, and ultimately, gender roles.  These just
happen to be subjects that are held somewhat in awe by Americans and 
some others.  It's as if these subjects are sacred, mysterious, things
that we can't start to understand, powerful things that it's better to
just not look at.  Yes, we are *preoccupied* with sex and gender -
but we don't typically *examine* them.

For instance, almost every movie has to have a big-deal heterosexual
love story within it.  Very predictable, very reassuring - like a
ritual.  Many are uneasy when an iteration includes a little something
unusual.  Another example is that the Republican National Convention
could include large amounts of dogma and unreality about gender roles
yet many take this party and ticket as viable and correct.

Girls being attracted to boys and boys being attracted to girls is
one requirement of each respective gender.  It is one of the most
demanding - very hard to fake it.  People who don't follow this
requirement are perhaps seen as fools headed for certain destruction.
In that case, disapproval, yelling insults, even physical attacks,
would seem warranted; it may scare off such *dangerous* behavior.
See; they care :-).

Let me illustrate further with southpaws.  Similar to our actual
situation with homosexuality, if hands and/or communication were
subjects held in awe, left-handed people would be seen as Devil
Spawn.  If a left-handed person were to decide to look at her/his
hands and the way s/he wants to write (etc.) as a plain fact, the
falseness of the label "unclean" for left-handedness would become
clear.  After this, a person could naturally come to question their
other assumed truths about hands and communications.

After exploring these subjects, these people would have views of
hands and communications that would be closer to reality than the
views of most of their neighbors.  Yet their neighbors would see
their more realistic approaches as rash and wrong, flying in the
face of the trusted codes of behavior and attitude.  They'd see
these southpaws as freaks who seemingly randomly disobey the
proper mores.  That is, the Devil Spawn identity for southpaws
would seem to be proven right next door.  Even left-handed
neighbors who just hadn't looked at these issues yet.

Back to our situation.

Now, people who discover that they do not fit part of the gender
roles (notably the one about sexual attraction) may try to (a) deny
to themselves that they are different; (b) try to outwardly conform
despite their preference; (c) try to make up for the glitch by being
very conformist on the rest of the gender role; (d) question the
value of the gender roles, in general.  For a given person, it's
likely that, over time, more than one of these will be tried.  And
it's to be expected that different people will likely try these things
in different ways.

  I think the questioning in (d) is a logical and beneficial thing to do.
  Very likely the (d) choice will show the person just where the gender
  roles are useful and just how much of them are only useless restrictions.
  Freedoms can open up where one had hardly suspected there was rigidity.
  Beliefs can fit reality better, life flows more easily.

To continue, some of the (d) people, trying on the forbidden roles,
widening options, making illustrations about the roles' absurdity,
will appear to others as extreme proofs of the myths about homosexuals:
Very Bizarre, Confused; Insane; Dangerous.  This also goes for straight
people testing gender assumptions: others wonder if they're "you know,
That Way."  It seems the role associations work in any direction,
preserving those very same associations.  "If you're doing X, you may
as well be a woman."  "If you do Y, you must be a dyke."  "If you
like motss, you must do Z."

I can imagine parallel sorts of things happening in the southpaw
illustration.

It seems clear that everyone would be better off taking the plunge
and asking questions/ exploring gender and sex issues.  Then, when sex
and gender roles are *not* held in awe, gay people will draw no very
special notice or threat, and neither would people who cross the lines 
of gender roles in the other ways; there would be no sizable and serious
gender roles - except as antiquated notions...

----

Now, what to do about the understandable tendency to misunderstand all
of this?

The people who challenge gender lines aren't hurting anyone - except
when it spurs an attacker.  Line-crossing amounts to self expression.
Maybe it sparks questions for a few people about gender roles, too.
Of course, that would be a positive.

Conformity is not the answer because no one learns anything at all.

Perhaps we just need to tell the critics that Questioning Gender
Assumptions is a Useful and Safe Pursuit.  People questioning gender
roles (by objective means, experiential means, what-have-you) would
not only result in equal rights for gay people but free *everyone*
of a lot of nameless anxieties about sex and gender issues.  Everyone
wins.  Not explaining anything just puts too much hope on the average
person noticing what's going on.

It seems as if this exersize wrt gay rights may also raise awareness
for people about discrimination issues in general.  That is, that
these discrimination issues aren't "special interests" but in
everyone's interest to explore.

<end of amature social analysis>


just to add more grist for the mill...

| "The gay 'movement' ...  fails most miserably where it should be the
| most progressive - in its sexual politics.  Specifically, there is
| a segregation of the sexes where unity should exist, a veiled mysogyny
| which privileges fag culture over dyke, and a fear of the expression
| of femininity which has led to the gruesome phonomenon of the 'straight-
| acting' gay male."    New Lavender Panthers (from HOMOCORE #7)

--
--Suzanne Morine          smorine@nyx.cs.du.edu
--"Toleration is the greatest gift of the mind; it requires the same effort
--of the brain that it takes to balance oneself on a bicycle."  Helen Keller
--