Tag Archives: lgbtiq

Linkspam – end of January 2012 edition

From the new and awesome blog Queereka, “Sunday School Salutations” which is soon (probably already has) launched a sex advice column and is seeking questions:

The most instructive answer I got was “your first column must contain at least two (2) hymen jokes.” However, this answer is mostly useful because it is pretty bad advice, at least as regards the goal of this column and this blog. I mean, not to get all RAWR HETEROSEXISM on my friend (who was, of course, making a joke), but one of the goals I have for Sunday School in the first place is to tear down the dominant narrative about sex. Raise your hands, dear readers: did your first sexual experience involve hymen rupture?

Yeah, mine didn’t, either.

The Huff Post lists some very interesting tech failures at marketing products to women, noting that women are already big consumers of electronics.

On Monday HSN announced the results of a survey by the international research firm Parks Associates that asked 2,000 adults about purchases they wanted to make before 2012. The results showed women outstripped men in their interest in owning electronics, with 18 percent of women planning on buying a tablet before 2012 (compared to 15 percent of men), 20 percent of women wanted a laptop (only 14 percent of men did) and 20 percent of women planning on purchasing smartphones — compared to 17 percent of men, Mashable reports.

The MailOnline has an interesting piece on the BMI of models and how they would be ranked as anorexic.  This article is NSFW – there is nude “plus” size model posing with a “straight” model.

Tesseral Harmonics reblogs (it’s Tumblr, I’m not sure how it works really) on ““Bisexual” is not oppressive, can we talk about biphobia and straight privilege? and other thoughts on bisexuality”:

It’s a big problem that people who are bisexually identified (or engage in bisexual behavior) are dismissed and mocked by gay/queer/lesbian people. I honestly don’t think I need to spell out an explanation of why it’s important for spaces that call themselves “queer” or “LGBT” to be inclusive. In short, anyone who is bi (in name or behavior) is still queer and may need support as a queer person. Biphobia also makes it difficult for anyone who is gay-identified and experiencing sexual fluidity (Lisa Diamond’s research on sexual fluidity (pdf) is super interesting, btw). It also means that gay people who are in “straight” relationships for whatever reasons (family and religion are two examples) are dismissed by the queer community. Biphobia is part of a culture of identity-policing, where if you don’t adhere closely enough to the requirements delineated by the official bureau of gayness you’re out of the club.

Related Posts:

Bad Journalism – The Age (12 Jan 2012)

Two articles in today’s Age (online) were so jaw-droppingly bad I thought I’d draw everyone’s attention to them.  The first is an article sourced from AFP, and appears to have been just been pasted in without any consideration of the AWFUL language included.

The article is titled, “Outrage as naked women dance for tourists in ‘human zoo‘”, seems just from the title, to be an article on tourism exploiting women – and then you read further in, not too much further in, just the first paragraph:

Rights campaigners and politicians have condemned a video showing women from a protected and primitive tribe dancing for tourists in exchange for food on India’s far-flung Andaman Islands.

Primitive?  Primitive?  According to who?  Is there any way that sentence could be any more racist?  The women are part of the  Jarawa people, an group of people indigenous to the Andaman Islands.  How hard is that to say versus “primitive”?

The second article is titled, “Court in same sex tennis furore” is in relation to Margaret Court and her issues with an equal marriage protest/action at the Australian Open.  Hoyden About Town blogged very nicely about the issue here.

Part way through the article…

Court, a 24-times grand slam singles champion and a pastor at the Victory Life Centre church in Perth, has long opposed same-sex marriage but sparked a fierce backlash from retired women’s champions Martina Navratilova and Billie Jean King, both homosexuals, when she reiterated her views in a Western Australian newspaper recently.

“both homosexuals”?????  I don’t know how Martina Navratilove and Billie Jean King actually identify, but the correct terms most commonly used to describe women in same sex relationships, are lesbian or bisexual.  The term homosexual has a negative history from being classed as a mental disorder.  Steve Williams has a great blog on the issue here.

To my mind, the word “homosexual” has a very clinical cadence to it, and the emotions it seems to invoke appear to stem from the not too distant past when homosexuality was still thought of as an affliction and a mental disorder. There’s also an inherently androcentric core to the word “homosexual.” Of course, it can be used to refer to both gay and lesbian people, but I’d wager that the word “homosexual” is mostly used in reference to gay men, especially when utilized by social and religious conservatives. Moreover, it probably carries notions of sex and, by extension, anal sex or sodomy, which is usually one of the central pillars of disgust threaded throughout most prejudiced material.

 

Related Posts:

Being out and proud

I have discussed this on my poly blog (which will one day be migrated to here) before, that it is rare to have a negative experience when I out myself as either poly or queer these days.  Now there are many reasons for that, some of which are internal and some external (white, middle class, cis-female, able bodied privilege ahoy).  Oh and the fact that I get to choose my audience also plays a large part.  It is rare that I am outed and feel that I have to justify myself and my choices – though that happens from time to time.

There is a big difference in power between telling someone something in an environment in which you are comfortable and have an expectation of the reaction and having someone else tell someone with the potential for accusation, interrogation and a negative reaction, not to mention real and actual harm.  I don’t go around telling people I know who will react badly because I don’t want to waste the energy on ameliorating that reaction and any relationships that may be impacted.  Though sometimes I am tempted to be evil and tell people so they go away and leave me alone – sadly those situations are usually ones where my parents would be impacted instead of me and I don’t think that’s fair on them.

Continue reading Being out and proud

Related Posts:

Linkspam of the gods December 2011

Stuff I’ve been reading about the place:

Stephanie Bolt’s (Andrew Bolt’s sister)’s piece: I want marriage equality for all

Some gays and lesbians view their relationships as equal to those of straight people. But I know of others who would admit to feeling “lesser” or, even if they don’t, are fed up with receiving negative physical, verbal or other signals from the world around them.

Burt Humburg’s journey to outing himself as gay: ‘There’s only one Burt’

“(Suppressing the desires) worked for a while. … but I started to become quietly insane,” Humburg said. “My craziness was getting worse and worse and worse. I was a jerk.”

He said he briefly considered suicide.

“Within 10 seconds I concluded that was not the answer,” Humburg said. “I just thought, ‘You’re a straight-A student headed (into) medicine at some point. What are you gonna do – throw that all away just because of some Bronze Age understandings of the Bible and human sexuality?’ Let’s just take this slow and see how it goes.

“So I stopped fighting it. And as soon as I allowed (homosexuality) to be a consideration – bam. I knew.”

A fascinating article on the Christian basis of the understanding of marriage in Australia: Should Marriage Be A Life Sentence?

In order to preclude the legal recognition of same-sex marriages, the 2004 Bill proposed to incorporate the common law definition of marriage set out by Lord Penzance in the case of Hyde noted above, which involved the status of Mormon polygamous unions made in America. Lord Penzance noted: “marriage, as understood in Christendom, may for this purpose be defined as the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others”. The words, “as understood in Christendom”, do not appear in section 46 of the Marriage Act nor in section 43 of the Family Law Act. The Hyde definition is otherwise intact in those sections.

Sady Doyle’s article: The Girl’s Guide to Staying Safe Online

For years, it’s been an open secret that having a visibly female online identity – especially if one writes about sexism – is a personal security risk. Highly visible bloggers such as Jessica Valenti report receiving hate mail every day. Some have been subject to campaigns aimed at getting them fired. This doesn’t only happen to high-profile feminists, or women; some people, including men, have been harassed at work simply for commenting on the wrong blog. But it is a gendered phenomenon: W.H.O.A. reports that, in 2010, 73% of cyberstalking victims were female.

A great article on body image and how large women with breasts can been seen as problematic in the office: It Happened to Me: I Got in Trouble for Bringing My Boobs to the Office

At one point in the “conversation,” I’d tried to point out that my dress wasn’t any different from what the other women in the department wore. In fact, it was pretty common knowledge one of the other women had a certain outfit she wore when she wanted something from her boss. I, uh, did not mention that to the department head. That was when my department head told me, in uncomfortable and tentative wording, that the issue was really my large boobs.

Related Posts:

“It has always been that way since the dawn of humanity.”

You know, with the exception of scientific laws, every time I hear someone say the above, I know that I have ever just heard or am about to hear, something that is complete bollocks.

So today the Australian Labour Party voted in favour of “gay” marriage (from here on in referred to as equal marriage).  The ALP national platform now supports equal marriage, though sadly the conscience vote still holds.  I don’t understand how elected representatives are allowed to vote with their conscience and not with the will of their electorate, clearly that’s just me (and several million other Australians).

Continue reading “It has always been that way since the dawn of humanity.”

Related Posts:

Google Plus and why I left

This is relatively old news now, but I quit Google Plus (G+ from here on in).  My reasons were relatively simple, and yet not at the same time.  I had planned to write this post when I quit, but stuff happened and I didn’t.  Stilgherrian’s piece at ABC’s The Drum today reminded me of why I was going to write, and effectively summed up what I was going to say, but I’ll lay out my reasons nonetheless.

Continue reading Google Plus and why I left

Related Posts:

What is “natural”?

Fred Nile decided to have a hate filled rant today after Penny Wong shared her happy news that her partner was pregnant and thanked the IVF services that made this possible.  I don’t want to give Fred Nile more air time, because I don’t think he deserves it, but I do want to focus on just one tiny point he’s made that is just so silly that it needs to be looked at.

She needn’t have made it public – it just promotes their lesbian lifestyle and trying to make it natural where it’s unnatural.

 

Fred Nile is clearly an arbiter of what is and what is not natural and he should be the man we all approach whenever we want to ask what is and what is not natural.  Because really, what is “natural”?

If we go back to the Bible that Fred Nile believes that all of us (even those that aren’t Christian) should follow, it has a lot to say about what is good and what is bad, but doesn’t focus all that much on what is natural and what is unnatural.  Clearly Nile believes that unnatural things are bad, so modern society with our reliance on technology, plastics and machines must be unnatural, since they are not directly from nature.  I’m sure that Nile would agree that modern society is a bad thing, what with our desire for equality for the LGBTIQ community, so Nile must also be pushing to return modern society back to an agrarian age where we lived more in harmony with nature (including suffering from natural diseases and famines).

Perhaps Nile is suggesting that being queer is unnatural, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary in nature.  After all plenty of animal species show evidence of homosexual and/or trans* behaviour, and nothing is more natural than animals in the wild.  So if animals in the wild are busy shagging whatever takes their fancy, why is it unnatural that some humans are doing the same?  What is so unnatural about same sex relationships when taken into broader consideration with the whole animal kingdom, especially as we evolved from an ape-like ancestor?

Even if Nile is a creationist (it’s hinted at in his Wikipedia profile), according to his beliefs god created every person in His image (capitalisation only for differentiation between Nile and god), so if god created queer people, then surely that’s god’s will.  Who is Nile to say what is and what is not natural when god has created someone to be who they are?

In the end, surely what would be more unnatural would be someone who is same sex attracted forcing themselves to be in a relationship with someone of the opposite sex just to satisfy the desires of conservative Christian wankers.

Related Posts:

Being queer and (not) donating blood

I can’t donate blood because I am married (and have sex with) a man who has sex with men (mostly a man, but sometimes other men).  Regardless of how safe our sex lives are, regardless of all the rules we have in place to keep us disease free, we can’t donate blood.  My husband, because he has sex with men (mostly his husband), and me because I have sex with my husband.

But that’s where the scrutiny stops.  My other husband (the straight one) and my girlfriend can all go and donate blood, because they aren’t having sex with someone who is male who has sex with other men.  The scrutiny stops one jump beyond even those the disease vectors don’t.  I’m unable to find the classic HIV ad that was screened in Australia (on YouTube at least) which asked if you knew who your partner’s previous sexual partners were, and were you safe from HIV.

My tribe practices safe sex.  We have strict rules, which include regular STI testing, to keep ourselves free from diseases and to protect each other.  We trust each other and practice full disclosure, so it feels like a bit of a slap in the face when the Red Cross doesn’t do the same.  I do get that 65% of new diagnoses of HIV are from men who sleep with men (2009), and if you take the ultraconservative number of queer people in Australia to be 5% of the total population, then that’s slightly more than one in every 1000 gay men who are diagnosed with HIV – odds that those who rely on blood transfusions don’t want to have to face.  Therefore banning (deferring as it tends to be put) men who have sex with men from donating blood is easier than well all of the other options.

But to tell men who have sex with men that if they remain male-sex free for 12 months then they can donate blood is… well… rude.  “Hello men who have sex with men, I know that you enjoy it, may be in a long-term, monogamous relationship with that man that you’re having sex with, but we treat all queer men the same, so when you’re next celibate for 12 months then we’ll think about letting you back in our club.  In the mean time, go on and do that thing which is risky and leads to us rejecting your blood.”

Of course, the other problem with the whole thing is that if my husband was not bisexual and we were still openly polyamorous, I could go and have risky sex every weekend with whoever I wanted, and donate blood.  The Red Cross’s rules are based on statistics and not actual behaviour.  Because more men who have sex with men are diagnosed with HIV than any other group, all those queer men who are in monogamous relationships or who practice safe sex are discriminated against, as are their female partners (if they have them).  All heterosexual individuals who engage in risky sex don’t have to worry about being banned from donating blood (should they want to).

There has to be a better way of dealing with this.  Of capturing information about STI status from existing STI tests, of asking questions about relationship status, and asking questions about the type of sex engaged in by those who wish to donate blood.  Perhaps instead of being squeamish about asking questions or providing answers to such things, we should be more open about STI status, sexual history and relationship status, especially when it comes to essential supplies.

 

UPDATE:  I’ve just been alerted to this great story of a man being turned away from donating blood in the US because he “appeared” gay.  The story also has more on the banning of queer men from blood donation.

Related Posts:

The Democratic Labour Party

I am related by marriage to the newly elected Democratic Labour Party senator for Victoria.  This is not a happy thing.  I wrote him a letter:

Continue reading The Democratic Labour Party

Related Posts:

38th Down Under Feminists’ Carnival

Down Under Feminists' Carnival Logo

Hello everyone and welcome to the 38th Down Under Feminists’ Carnival.  Thanks for all the fantastic submissions and to everyone who wrote all the fantastic articles I’m linking to.

If at any point I have misnamed, mislabled, or misgendered someone, please let me know immediately so that I can correct my error If I have included a post of yours that you would not like included, please let me know and I will remove it.  Should any of my links be broken, just let me know and I’ll attempt to fix it.

Continue reading 38th Down Under Feminists’ Carnival

Related Posts: