|The Flurry of Gay Rights Thingies on LJ and Why I Don't Support Gay Rights
||[06 Jan 2008|02:09am]
I'm riddled with flu and flu medicine right now, so forgive the rambleness of this post, but...
When I first started getting involved with 'gay rights' groups and what-not, it was probably 1995. The whole 'gay rights' movement had well taken hold. I always thought labeling it as 'gay rights' was a mistake. Proof of that was the fact that those opposed to 'gay rights' had successfully -- and I do mean successfully -- pinned the term "special rights" onto it.
And you cannot argue that. Part of a person's first objection to 'gay rights' is that it seems, by title alone, to be special rights that gays are demanding.
Of course, we know that not to be true.
Still, in the world of euphemisms dumbing down the language and creeping into everyday life, one can't help but latch on to a notion that 'gay rights' aren't rights that straight folks would have and, therefor, they are special rights that gays want.
From the get-go, I've always said that we should refer to them as HUMAN RIGHTS. Turn the tables on the idea of 'special rights' on to the heterosexuals. THEY are the ones with the 'special rights', not us queers. They can marry -- they can get tax breaks -- they can have special discounts on insurance -- they can be at the bedside of their loved ones when they are in critical condition at hospital. Heterosexuals -- and those in heterosexual relationships -- are the ones with the special rights.
These are HUMAN rights we queers are asking for -- nothing more. Nothing special about them.
That's why I've always hated the term 'gay rights'. And, in this world where wording is everything -- it's helped fund wars and made people feel good about almost every war since WWII -- the term 'gay rights' has done nothing but keep those basic human rights well past our reach.
I'm sorry -- I abhor the term. I won't use it. You can say that I'm arguing semantics, and fine -- maybe I am. But it's semantics and word play that has kept the Republicans in power for so long, even when their power base is faltering, even when their numbers are wrecking public havoc on their own ideals and mores. It's how 'tactical withdrawal' can soften the blow of a 'retreat'. Or how "we killed our own troops" can be made not only easier to swallow, but also neutral in emotional impact (read: none) by simply referring it as "collateral damage".
Altho' I don't have any proof to back this up, I'd be willing to bet that if we had simply referred to it as 'human rights' all along, I'd be married by now. (... well, and divorced, because he was an aaassshooooooole -- and so was I, if I'm truly honest about it ...)
So... if you wonder why this very gay, very out, very angry!Queer isn't reposting the "DO YOU SUPPORT GAY RIGHTS" thing... well... now you know.
Make no mistake about it, tho, I'm still a very out, very angry Queer...
I'm just not down for Gay Rights.
I'm down for Human Rights for all.
Including us fags and 1/2-fags.
[ cross-posted: CJ | GJ | IJ | LJ | JF ]
|The Type of Nerd Gabe Be
||[06 Jan 2008|10:26pm]
I can't remember where I got this from... ~shrug~ Probably just trolling around whilst high on NyQuil and bookmark-tagging anything that looked remotely interesting... you should see some of the bookmarks, too. ~phew~
At any rate, nothing really shocking here.
|What Be Your Nerd Type? |
Your Result: Musician
Doo doo de doo waaaa doo de doo! (<-- That's you playing something.) Everyone appreciates the band/orchestra geeks and the pretty voices. Whether you sing in the choir, participate in a school/local band, or sit at home writing music, you contribute a joy to society that everyone can agree on. Yay! Welcome to actually doing something for poor, pathetic human souls. (Just kidding.)
|What Be Your Nerd Type?|
Quizzes for MySpace
I tag everyone within eyeshot of this journal.
That means you, nits!!