![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
23 Feb 2007
There's this post on today's ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
metafandom that pissed me off so severely just from the summary that I had to pause before going to read it.
For one thing, the more I look at this summary, the more offended I am by her list of adjectives for her friend. Perhaps her readers weren't going to grasp her opinion that her friend is just a big ol' spoilsport without that litany of what she obviously sees as negative qualities. Earth-loving? Anti-capitalist? She must be a hysterical man-hater and we shouldn't take her seriously! She's obviously dropped out of society and is therefore irrelevant!
For another thing, I'm astonished by her description of lesbians' priviledge to be seen as non-threatening by heterosexual male desire as a step forward. Is she honestly under the impression that that objectification is a new development, or that any positive acceptance of homosexuality as a whole as valid and non-deviant would be its logical consequence? Lesbian desire was largely irrelevant through much of the history of Western society's criminalisation of male homosexual desire - or it was occasionally pathologised instead, the women portrayed as hysterical and stuck in mental institutions; but it was hardly persecuted in the same way.
This is the reality of social acceptance of gayness and objectification of lesbians. A couple of years ago, I lived for a few months with my aunt and uncle, and my aunt and I were talking about coming out and what my three-year-old cousin's life would be like if he were gay. My uncle was saying that he isn't homophobic, but when my aunt said, "What will you say to Perrin if he turns out to be gay, then?" My uncle responded immediately, "He won't be."
"You don't know that," said my aunt. "He could be! What if he is?"
"No, he couldn't," said my uncle. "He won't."
My aunt and I pointed out how impossible it was to predict, offered population-percentage statistics; but he remained completely unmoved and adamant that it simply wasn't possible. His attitude wasn't aggressive or angry in the least, it was baffled. He's an extreme liberal who honestly believes that there's not a molecule of prejudice in him, and also honestly believes there is no possibility his son could be gay. He maintaned the baffled attitude until my aunt pointed out that his attitude could be offensive to me, whereupon he hastened to assure us that he loves me, and likes lesbians, of course!
"That," said my aunt, "is because they're not threatening to you."
"I'm not threatened," he said uncomfortably. "It's just, that's gross."
This, by the way, is my female cousin [other side of the family]'s attitude to gay men as well, and used to be her attitude to lesbians some time before I came out ("Because what if they hit on you?"), although she later moved on to teasing her boyfriend with the possibility of a threesome ("Only if you can get Britney Spears to agree to it." "What about a lookalike?" "No.").
Is this to say that sexual fantasy is wrong, or degrading? Of course not. But sexual fantasies are not the same thing as political activism, because finding something hot in your sexual fantasies isn't the same thing as advocating for it in reality, as fans of all kinds of porn popular in fandom can assure you (incest and chan, for the most widespread examples).
metafandom that pissed me off so severely just from the summary that I had to pause before going to read it. darkhecatemoon in
For one thing, the more I look at this summary, the more offended I am by her list of adjectives for her friend. Perhaps her readers weren't going to grasp her opinion that her friend is just a big ol' spoilsport without that litany of what she obviously sees as negative qualities. Earth-loving? Anti-capitalist? She must be a hysterical man-hater and we shouldn't take her seriously! She's obviously dropped out of society and is therefore irrelevant!
For another thing, I'm astonished by her description of lesbians' priviledge to be seen as non-threatening by heterosexual male desire as a step forward. Is she honestly under the impression that that objectification is a new development, or that any positive acceptance of homosexuality as a whole as valid and non-deviant would be its logical consequence? Lesbian desire was largely irrelevant through much of the history of Western society's criminalisation of male homosexual desire - or it was occasionally pathologised instead, the women portrayed as hysterical and stuck in mental institutions; but it was hardly persecuted in the same way.
This is the reality of social acceptance of gayness and objectification of lesbians. A couple of years ago, I lived for a few months with my aunt and uncle, and my aunt and I were talking about coming out and what my three-year-old cousin's life would be like if he were gay. My uncle was saying that he isn't homophobic, but when my aunt said, "What will you say to Perrin if he turns out to be gay, then?" My uncle responded immediately, "He won't be."
"You don't know that," said my aunt. "He could be! What if he is?"
"No, he couldn't," said my uncle. "He won't."
My aunt and I pointed out how impossible it was to predict, offered population-percentage statistics; but he remained completely unmoved and adamant that it simply wasn't possible. His attitude wasn't aggressive or angry in the least, it was baffled. He's an extreme liberal who honestly believes that there's not a molecule of prejudice in him, and also honestly believes there is no possibility his son could be gay. He maintaned the baffled attitude until my aunt pointed out that his attitude could be offensive to me, whereupon he hastened to assure us that he loves me, and likes lesbians, of course!
"That," said my aunt, "is because they're not threatening to you."
"I'm not threatened," he said uncomfortably. "It's just, that's gross."
This, by the way, is my female cousin [other side of the family]'s attitude to gay men as well, and used to be her attitude to lesbians some time before I came out ("Because what if they hit on you?"), although she later moved on to teasing her boyfriend with the possibility of a threesome ("Only if you can get Britney Spears to agree to it." "What about a lookalike?" "No.").
Is this to say that sexual fantasy is wrong, or degrading? Of course not. But sexual fantasies are not the same thing as political activism, because finding something hot in your sexual fantasies isn't the same thing as advocating for it in reality, as fans of all kinds of porn popular in fandom can assure you (incest and chan, for the most widespread examples).
