Posts Tagged ‘lesbian’

If patriarchal sexism punishes women for not being men, racism punishes people of colour for not being white, and homophobia punishes gay and gender variant for not being straight – does that mean that in some kind of (or someone’s) ‘perfect’ world, everyone would be white males… who are all exclusively heterosexual??

How would that work?

Diversity and difference makes this world tick, that is why we, to each other, should talk.
The sound of human history.

Read Full Post »

Our lives contain degrees of narrative, story, plot, and sub-plot; each degree possessing many levels of meaning and substance. In the society we live, there are degrees of life that are defined, recognised, or generally accepted as normal (normative) or (if you will) the default.

The boundaries of what is considered normative in society cut a swathe through many aspects of being human: through the physical, cognitive, social, and emotional ways of being, even to how one identifies and defines themselves.

The language generally used to describe those outside these boundaries of ‘normativity’ is invariably negative or derogatory. The very word disability, for those outside perceived physical, cognitive, social ‘normalcy’, is to suggest that these people are without, or have little, ability (compared to those within ‘normalcy?). Groups that advocate for people defined as disabled, often accept and use this term to identify themselves. They ought think again.

Those who are normal to themselves, yet are outside the confines of what is considered to be normative, have, in my opinion, transcended accepted normalcy and gone beyond that specific normative.

The gay, lesbian, bisexual transgender, transsexual, intersex, queer… GLBTTIQ… the alphabet mangled identity of those communities are beyond a normative… they are beyond the hetero-normative – they transcend hetero-sex, heterosexual definitions of sex, and heterosexual definitions of gender (expression, roles and performance) and are therefore the community that is beyond the hetero-normative.

These communities have changed their alphabet mangle identity over and over again trying to be as inclusive, yet seemingly trying to identify each individual group in that broader identity. The GLB community became the GLBT, GLBTI, GLBTTI, GLBTTIQ, GLBTTIQQ, any number of conglomerations of letters and identities defining people who are all outside the confines of heterocentric normativity or like myself, are beyond the hetero-normative.

Read Full Post »

It is again May, and the radio and television is full of Mother’s Day this and Mother’s Day that… “Buy this for your mother to show her you love her”…

Do people love their mothers, or are able to express love for their mother, only on the second Sunday in May?

My mother died when I was young, and I have very little memory of her, so my view of Mother’s day is somewhat jaundiced; but even so, can’t people tell their mother they love them on days other than Mother’s day… can’t we tell those we love that we love them without a special day for it?

In today’s personally organised, deadline driven, time-is-money lifestyle, is our capacity to love dependent on what day it is?

“When do I need to tell my mother/father/partner/child/anyone else that I love them?… I’ll put it into my PDA/Mobile Phone/Laptop computer.”

Do we need to be reminded to love? Do we need Mother’s day to remind us of love (or gratitude) we may have for our mother? Do we need Father’s day to remind us of love (or gratitude) we may have for our father? Do we need St. Valentine’s Day to remind us of love we have for those closest to us? Do we need Christmas to remind us of the love we ought to have for each other?

Are we so bereft of love that we need to be reminded of it?

Then, there are some who (seemingly needing to be reminded of their own capacity to love)  judge some people’s love to be wrong, saying it should be shunned or hidden (i.e. the love of gays and lesbians).

Why do people not tell those they love that they love them? is it some kind of secret? is there some level of embarrassment to saying they love them? and if embarrassing…why?

In a love-starved world; witholding your love for another, is akin to witholding food from a starving person. Your words may be that thing that person needs to go on through that day/week/month/life…

If you feel it…say it

To those who judge love and decide what it is, who can experience it, and who can not – I say that you twist love into knots of contrivance. You reduce it to a conditional priviledge, possibly even into a commodity of trade – in that, if you love someone that person must love you in return.

No, love is not something to trade, or something to be bartered – love is

Your love is something that only you can feel – love is

Your love is reflected by another’s love – love is

Love with expectations is trade, love without expectations is love.

Love is not X Y or Z

Love is

Love is

Love simply is

Read Full Post »

Coming out is firstly about bestowing ownership of ourselves to ourselves.

During the American Civil War, the President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This document lead to the end of legal slavery in that country. It is now considered basic morality that no person can own another person, but do we really own ourselves?
From the moment we are born, we are labeled, categorized, pigeonholed in one way or another, and we become both slave to and defender of categories and labels. Such labels and categories carry with them not only dictionary definitions, but can be defined in many ways, and such labels can often have confining expectations placed upon them.
As children we taught what everything is called, for example, the names of colours, and things that are associated with that colour. We are made aware of the differences between boys and girls, and words that are used to describe each. As we get older we are socialized into what is expected of ourselves and other people as far as behaviour, dress lifestyles. As children we are expected to become slaves to society’s expectations, by convention, by religion. We become owned, lock, stock and barrel, by the demand that we fit in to the straight-jacket labels imposed upon us, and that no matter what, you must fit in, and difference to the norms is not to be accepted…
Differences to what is considered ‘normal’ are often ridiculed, vilified, and sometimes condemned. From a young age many people learn derogitory words that are used against people who are perceived as different, many learn to pour scorn on those that are not considered ‘one of us’ in whatever way.
For those who are perceived as different, and are the target of hostility of those around them and the society in general, the upset, shame and internalised pain is felt deeply and can be carried for a lifetime. The constant struggle for acceptance, the inability to fit in to a patriarchal heterosexist society can rob a person of their self worth, or of a sense of belonging in their family, community, or even themselves.
Coming out – to ourselves
Coming out is a term generally used to describe an act of disclosure, a finishing point, but there does not seem to be a term for the journey taken to reach that point. I define coming out as both the journey and the disclosure. To me, the journey begins when a person first recognizes that they are different to the societal norm, in this illustration, the heterosexist norm; lesbian, gay, bisexual, or trans (or whatever term applies). This recognition can be an extremely scary experience for some, and my cause them to fight against it and do things to show that they are not what they may be (in a sense trying to ‘cure’ themselves), a homosexual person marries heterosexually, the trans person may do extremely stereotypical activities corresponding to their sex designation at birth (in the case of MTF – sometimes dangerous activities). This is done in an attempt to fit in… both internally, dealing with their socialization and expectations imposed upon them by the society they live in, and externally to give the appearance of fitting in. We are slaves to perceptions..
But there comes a time when the ‘act’ wears thin and not even the actor can believe it anymore, and the person must at last join those who didn’t fight, and accept who they are and learn to own themselves.
Coming out is firstly about bestowing ownership of ourselves to ourselves. Recognising that we have a right to define ourselves as we are, live our lives as we decide, and deserve the same dignity as anyone else, is knowing you own yourself and you belong as you. The journey may be smooth, the journey may be difficult and painful, but we are freed by the transitive journey from trying to fit in to belonging.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

It is a year since I began this blog, and to ‘celebrate’ that anniversary and just because I feel it needs to be said again, I repost my first post of this blog from January 2008:

What follows is a talk I gave on January 20, 2005 at a disability and rehabilitation conference. While parts of what I spoke of are not new concepts, it is in how I presented them, and made several links that caught the interest of some of those present… Sadly, what I say in this talk is understatement.

I was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome when I was 39 years old.

Even though I was diagnosed with a condition that I had lived with all my life, and the effects of my difference had been noticed and acted upon, I can stand here and say with total confidence – I have never suffered from Asperger syndrome.

I have never suffered directly from its effects on my behaviour, I have never once experienced pain nor spontaneously bled at the moment when saying anything or doing anything inappropriately. I have not needed hospitalisation at the moment of reacting in a way that I thought was appropriate for the situation.

I have never suffered from Asperger syndrome, because Asperger syndrome itself does not cause suffering… I suffer grievously, and have suffered for more than 35 years, from OPD.

OPD is an insidious thing to experience,

it affects everything we do,

it effects what we think of everything we do,

it robs many of us of ambition,

and it inevitably affects how we think of ourselves.

OPD causes great suffering, often including physical pain and injury. It causes rejection, isolation, depression, sometimes even suicide.

OPD can lead the most brilliant people to doubt their abilities, qualities, even their basic worth as people.

OPD can cause systems to work against sufferers.

Systems like education systems – where the sufferers are penalised for being themselves.

Welfare systems – where the suffering is downplayed,

family systems – where the sufferers find more pain where they ought find solace.

OPD can affect families; it can cause rejection by siblings and parents.

The only known cure for OPD is education…

So what is this scourge?

What is this thing that some must endure a ceaseless battle against?

What is this thing called OPD???

OPD is – Other People’s Discomfort.

We (aspies) may not feel the discomfort, but we certainly suffer its consequences…

Let me put it like this:

Being uncomfortable about other people for one reason or another may be seen as part of the human experience; but when that discomfort leads that person to purposefully act against the person he or she fees uncomfortable about then we enter a different realm.

A definition of the word ‘disorder’ is – a condition in which there is a disturbance of normal functioning. If a person changes their usual pattern of life to purposefully act against a person as a result of his or her discomfort over them, then this person is experiencing a disturbance of normal functioning, of normal social functioning.

When the level of discomfort felt reaches the point of acting against another in response to that discomfort, then I argue that the discomfort becomes a disorder… But I think all that goes without saying – we know that, but we don’t break it down in such a way. We do not call OPDD (Other People’s Discomfort Disorder) by that name, we take groups of people with a particular difference that make others uncomfortable, and sectionalise OPDD, hiding its common basis. Hatred may be seen as an emotional manifestation of OPDD.

We call the discomfort over people of different races or skin colours RACISM

We call the discomfort over people from different countries XENOPHOBIA

We call the discomfort over people who are (or may be) homosexual HOMOPHOBIA


We seem to call the discomfort over people with a disability NORMAL

Each a different weed, but all from the same seed (discomfort of difference).

Can you see the link? Can you see how discomfort over someone else’s difference is the basis for so much unnecessary pain?

ONLY through education, only through learning about the qualities different people have irrespective of what colour their skin is, or where they came from, who they love, or how their brain works, or anything can we hope to eradicate OPDD…

OPD occurs only as a result of encountering a person with OPDD…

If being uncomfortable about other people for one reason or another is part of the human experience, then we are all subject to OPDD…


Read Full Post »

Irrespective of our individual politics, especially surrounding contentious issues in human life, it is refreshing to read articles that appear to base arguments on the real life situation, and not on twisted interpretations or outright baseless fear-mongering. I found it interesting having these points to ponder.

Read Full Post »

The greatest threat to the longevity of the human species on planet Earth is not in the granting of equal rights to homosexuals, or in the legal recognition of any kind of human relationship. It is not even how we perceive gender roles to be now or in the future. The greatest threat to the longevity of the human species on a planet with dwindling resources, increasing pollution, and human induced climate change, is unfettered human breeding.

I am not calling for, nor would I endorse, a program of population reduction, or of the goal of zero population growth. I only wish to point out the fallacy in the words of the Pope – someone who is a supporter of unfettered procreation; for it appears he sees the sole purpose of human coupling is procreation, something he encourages at any and every opportunity.

I don’t think people need encouragement to reproduce, they will do it as they will… Granting same sex couples equal rights and dignity will not effect the birth-rate one jot.

The Pope said that The tropical rain forests deserve our protection, this is true, but it is the very thing he is arguing for that is the greatest threat to the rainforests and other wilderness areas around the world. Homosexuality is one of the things least threatening to the longevity of the species; simple mathematics will bare this out.

As the world’s population approaches 7 billion, let use you that number to base things on.

Depending on who you believe, anything from one to ten percent of the population is exclusively homosexual. If you discount the Kinsey report’s 10% mark, and give a conservative estimate, then maybe about 3% of the population is exclusively homosexual. Add to those, those who are bisexual, transsexual, and all manner of people who are not exclusively heterosexual, and for arguments sake, let us assume that 90% of the population at any one time is exclusively heterosexual, and largely capable of reproducing.

Seven billion people, 90% equates to 6,300 million people, 10% equates to 700 million people, think about that… if only one percent of the population that is exclusively homosexual, then there is about 70 million gays in the world right now. World population is anticipated to pass 9 billion soon after the year 2050 (in just over 40 years time).

Homosexuality a threat to human ecology? or is unrestrained heterosexuality and the resulting reproduction the greater threat?

(stats from wikipedia)

Read Full Post »

This drag show has been going for centuries

What is the difference between a Catholic Priest and a Drag Queen?


Read Full Post »

Apologists for the pope are beginning to raise their heads above their oft attacked parapet, claiming that the Pope was misquoted or mis-interpreted or translated.

This argument may on one hand be seen as disingenuous to media outlets who regularly cover the Pope and the Vatican; but on the other hand this argument undercuts the evengelical claim that the bible is the inerrent and infallible word of God.

If people cannot agree on what was said (and meant) in one language less than a week ago, how can we agree on what was said (and meant) up to 3000 years ago in a variety of ancient languages.

In what language did the Pope deliver his speech to the Curia? Was it in Latin, was it in Italian? In both cases whatever the Pope said had to be translated into English and interpreted as to its meaning. Words from one language may not have its exactly meaning counterpart in another, therefore what was meant in one language may have a different meaning after translation into another.

If the speech was delivered in Italian, then a contemporary language needed to be translated into another contemporary language, interpreted as to its meaning, taking into account political and social nuances of the time and publish it. I do not doubt that media commentators who cover the Vatican are aware of the languages used, what words mean, and what the underlying thrust of what is said.

One speech delivered about a week ago, having two translations, resulting in at least two interpretations.

What does that say about a book, some of it written as far back as 3000 years ago, in several ancient languages like Hebrew, Aramaic, Ancient Greek, and Latin, translated and re-translated into language after language through the centuries, given political interpretation after political interpretation through those same centuries, for it to arrive in our time in its various versions… the Bible!!

The inerrant and infallible word of God??

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »