Heterosexual Privilege (Part 2)

To continue my exploration into the world of heterosexual privilege, I wish to dive even deeper and explore related privileges. (And my references will be focused on a college campus and traditional college-age individuals)

Heterosexuals, as mentioned in the earlier post, have many privileges that the LGBTQ community does not have. In conjunction with the former ones, another privilege that heterosexuals share is the ability to talk about it. Not only talk about it, but it is actually encouraged. How often do you sit down in a public place (the union, a classroom, eateries, etc.) only to overhear the loud and obnoxious talking about a date they had last night, or the rough and wild sex? (And yes, I have heard these conversations)(I will, however, say that I believe it is healthy to talk about sex openly, and that sex is more taboo than it should be, even heterosexual sex). This is something that the LGBTQ community has a much harder time talking about. I know many people who are “ok” with homosexuality…as long as they don’t have to hear about it or see it. So much for being “ok” with it. That’s like me saying, “I accept you for who you are, just don’t talk about it to me”. Silencing someone is one of the worst things you can do.

Perhaps one of the first things when you meet someone that people want to know about is whether or not you have a boyfriend or girlfriend. This leads back to the compulsory heterosexuality mentioned in an earlier blog post. Since I identify as male and masculine, people automatically assume that I am straight. Because of this, the questions asked relate to heterosexuality: “do you have a girlfriend,” “what is your ideal girl,” or “who is the hottest female celebrity?” The list goes on and on. This automatically requires me to do one of two things, either I can lie and keep myself in the closet, or I can come out and risk whatever rejection may come. This is practically a daily occurrence for the LGBTQ community.

Moving on, the next privilege I would like to talk about is that of the coming out process. While not every coming out experience goes horribly wrong, or unbelievably right, inevitably, one will. Every time I (or the rest of the community) come out to someone, my stomach ties itself in knots. Most commonly, or at least the most heard of stories generally start out with “I have something to tell you” or some variation thereof. Immediately after saying these words, 1000s of thoughts rush through my head. These range from embracement, to rejection and every other reaction. While I may seem cool and collected on the outside, inside is a rush of emotions and chaos. There is really no other feeling like it that I have experienced. Coming out, at least for me, is both frightening and exciting. It allows me to be myself with that person for the duration of our relationship.

I feel that this blog is getting a little too long, so it appears there will be a third installment coming in the next couple of days or so, since I feel I have significantly more to say. In the first blog about heterosexual privilege, I made a call at the end. This time, I have an assignment that I believe will yield some interesting reactions for you. To friends you know, to family, call them. Come out to them. Not as something you do not identify as. Come out as yourself. If you’re straight, come out as such, if you’re gay (and comfortable) (notice how I need to add the “and comfortable” to the gay one, but not the straight one), come out as gay to people. However, for the heterosexual people out there, if you use “I have something to tell you”, make sure you pause. Pause for about 10 seconds. Think about the things the LGBTQ community must go through in this 1-20 (the range is much greater, I’m sure) seconds after you say that.

Heterosexual Privilege

Walking through campus here at UW Oshkosh (and I am sure on nearly any other campus across the United States, or, in all reality, nearly every city in the United States) on notices an incredible amount of public displays of affection (PDA).

Really, it's rather sickening. Of all of the privileges I have (unfortunately they exist) as a white male, I also lack many as a (mostly) gay male (a 5 on the Kinsey scale). For the short durations of my relationships, if I were to even consider holding my boyfriend's hand, that could get me in a world of hurt. While UW Oshkosh is relatively liberal compared to some schools, there are still those that feel threatened by same-sex couples; some feel so threatened that they would even revert to violence. This is, sadly, not an unheard of event on our campus, nor many others. Just a couple years ago when the civil union vote was on the ballot, a friend of mine was literally chased through campus, just for being gay.

While I found out about that only after I came out, in hindsight, I both reveled and hated the fact that I was not out. Reveled because I was safe, hated myself for not being out because, A) I was not being true to myself, and B) I am a tough guy, and I can handle myself, as well as stick up for others. But this leads us back to that big question about heterosexual privilege. The LGBTQ community lacks so much of this wonderful privilege granted to the straight community.

PDA, is the biggest example of this privilege. Any heterosexual couple can gladly walk down the street holding hands, stopping to kiss each other, or flirting with each other without skipping a beat. Change one of those sexes to match the sex of the other, and you're in a whole new ball park. People stare. Being in that situation, most certainly, you feel uncomfortable. Aside from that, at times, you can even feel fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of emotional scars, fear of being attacked.  These feelings are generally unknown to heterosexual couples. This in and of itself is a privilege, not having to feel these terrible emotions on a practically day-to-day basis. While there are SAFE (Student and Faculty for Equality) zones across our campus, not every campus has this.

Here is another example of privilege. This can be in high school, it can be in middle school, and yes, it can even exist in college. Anytime there is a dance, be it in a bar, in a school gymnasium, or in a second-party location, there is more and more heterosexual privilege being used. God forbid that I bring my (non-existent) boyfriend to one of these dances. If we danced how we would at a gay club in public like that! We would be shunned, ridiculed, or even worse, attacked. Again, there is a fear factor.

I will say this, however. There is a privilege that the Queer community has that the heterosexual community does not. And that privilege is a community. While some may argue that there is a straight community (and in many ways, there is) it is certainly different than the Queer community. Within the queer community, there is just sheer acceptance (although this is far from the truth in the great Queer community, the Queer community at Oshkosh is different, heck, maybe even unique). I heave met some of the best people, just by being a member. Coming from all walks of life, and each having their own identities provides the community with a unity that the heterosexual community does not have. It is a unity that can only happen with a relatively small group of people. It's indescribable.

I have a statement to make to end this blog post.

For those who will boldly stand out in a crowd (I am now this way, but was not always), I applaud you, and will stand by your side. For those of you who are not comfortable doing that, but are comfortable being out, I will stand by your side. And most importantly, for those of you still in the closet, I will always stand by your side. I understand that there is safety in the closet, trust me, I do. But I want you to understand this; while there may be struggles and hardships coming out, there is always a place for you in our community. I was once in the closet, and I will never go back in, regardless of how much privilege I would regain. I encourage you to find someone who you know will accept you, come out to them! If you cannot find anyone, e-mail me! I will support you in every way I know how to. (e-mail is rojaha54@gmail.com). This statement goes out to everyone. Come out as a straight ally, come out as a Gender Anarchist! Come out as Sex Positive! (Thank you Kate Bornstein). Just, "come out, come out, where ever you are!"

But He's Not A Redneck!

The question at hand here is are people outside of a group allowed to make fun of those inside the group. One such example of this is the Blue Collar Comedy Tour. The Blue Collar Comedy Tour, now one of the best rated comedy shows on Comedy Central consists of four men: Dan Whitney, Jeff Foxworthy, Bill Engvall and Ron White.

While two of the four men fit the role of "redneck comedian", two others, Dan Whitney, and Jeff Foxworthy come from different backgrounds. Foxworthy, although from the south, also grew up just outside of Atlanta Georgia, hardly "redneck country". Whitney grew up in south eastern Nebraska. (It should also be noted that Engvall comes from a town of 50,000+ people).

So how is it that they are able to make these jokes?

Personally, I feel that any comedian is able to make a joke about anyone or anything, regardless of their standing in that group/role. However, there is a point where jokes are funny, and jokes are offensive. I do not find the Blue Collar Comedy tour to be funny at all (with maybe one or two exceptions per comedian). But overall, it's not funny, so I will switch to a different example.

Jokes relating to the LGBTQ community. As a member of the community, often I am searching for new findings and media related to the community as a whole. Sometimes, I find what I am seeing incredibly funny: Will and Grace (although that's a different story and another blog post entirely), Ellen Degeneres, Kathy Griffin, Margaret Cho, etc. Yet, some of those people are not part of the community, in fact, only Ellen identifies as such (at least openly, I tend to have my doubts about some of the others). So why are they able to make jokes about the LGBTQ community without negative repercussions?

It seems to extend from the fact that they are all incredibly big allies to the community, however, there also seems to be a different idea behind this:

As Shana Naomi Krochmal writes in her article (entitled: "Did You Hear The One About A Straight Man Telling A Gay Joke? It Was Funny") in the August 2007 edition of Out magazine, "what does it matter who's telling the joke as long as being the punchline doesn't require letting haters off the hook?". It is very possible that those within the community telling jokes are incredibly homophobic (internalized homophobia). Those outside of any given community are able to joke around about different issues, but again, to a point.

After thinking about whether or not someone needs to be within a community to be able to joke about that community, we need to examine the jokes being told.

Are the facts in a joke true? Is that what makes them funny?

More often than not, I would say that the "facts" in a joke are perceived to be true, or perhaps at one time were true. Take Margaret Cho's joke about gay personal ads compared to straight personal ads. She notes a difference in the two, where one is looking for a companion (the straight ads) and the other (the gay ads) are looking just to get sex. This is one of the common misconceptions about the LGBTQ community, that they are more promiscuous than the straight community. But yet, it's funny. I almost peed my pants while watching that clip. I think what accounts for the difference is the fact that (generally)(and this is what makes the joke funny) straight people are much more conservative with theie sexuality than those in the LGBTQ community, so rather than bouncing around the issue, there is a direct path, and it is known what people want.

This goes for any kind of joke.

Compulsory Heterosexuality at work...

Let me just start by saying that this is not a humorous blog post (so it's not for class). After this class, I intend to change this blog into a blog that focuses more and more on my area of studies and one that I can look back to for inspiration/advice for others.

Having said that:

So I attended the Diversity and Leadership Conference at UW Oshkosh today. I have always been one to admit that I know we all (but even I) have a long way to go when it comes to diversity and understanding.

So the keynote speaker, Brian Johnson (amazing speaker, really) also presented one of the small educational sessions. In this session he told a story. (I don't know all the details, but I'll repeat the story best that I can)

A long time ago, there lived a king and queen in a kingdom by the sea. They lived in their castle with their servants. The only way into the castle was to cross a moat built around it. In the moat, there were man-eating fish. So the only way across it was a boat or the draw bridge.

Guarding the draw bridge was a strong guard. One day, the king told his wife not to leave the castle, and that he would be going on an overnight hunting trip. As he left, he told the guard not to let anyone into the castle, and if he did, there would be extreme consequences to pay.

So the king heads out into the country. That night, the queen leaves the castle covered in a shawl to meet her lover. Upon returning, the guard would not let the queen in. The queen demanded to be let in, for she's the queen of the castle. The guard stood strong.

Frustrated, the queen found a local fisherman who owned a boat. The captain of the boat said that he would ferry the queen over for 1000 gold pieces. The queen did not have that on her, and said to the captain that she could pay him when they arrived on the island. The captain of the boat denied that option.

The queen then went to her lover and begged for the money. The lover refused as well.

Still frustrated, and now angry, the queen went back to the drawbridge and tried to force her way past the guard. The guard after trying to stop her, took out his sword and killed her.


After that story was told. We were divided into groups and told to rank, in order from 1-5 (1 being most responsible, and 5 being least responsible) who is responsible for the queen's death.

(The 5 characters are the king, the queen, the guard, the captain of the boat, and the lover)

While discussing, Brian Johnson was listening to all of our conversations.

As a member of the LGBTQ community, I felt that I was so good and not assuming...and yet...in none of the groups did the possibility come up of the queen's lover being a female. Everyone referred to the lover as "he" or "him". This, along with other sessions, really made me realize that as "advanced" as I thought I was, I still have a LONG way to go.