Now that we have established a working list of stereotypes, we must ask ourselves where these stereotypes came from. Did they come out of thin air, or does each and every one of them have its roots in reality?
I believe that neither explanation is correct. I believe that a number of the stereotypes have roots in some form of reality, but not all of them do.
To begin, we must first define what reality is. Reality is what the rest of the population, that is the straight population, sees. With this definition, we no longer view the gay community as it appears to people within it, but we view it as an outsider might view it.
What this means is that we are getting an inaccurate picture of the gay community, but this is where the stereotypes arise. They come out of a warped view of homosexuals and homosexuality.
For example, the stereotypes relating to drag queens and “flaming” gays arise because they are the most obvious homosexuals. The large number of gays that do not adhere to this stereotype are largely ignored because the straight population cannot identify the non-stereotypical gays as being gay.
This has an interesting side effect of feeding itself. The straight population can only identify the “stereotypical” gays, so the straight population believes that all gays match the stereotypes. They never get a chance to encounter a non-stereotypical gay because they would never identify that person as gay.
So, the stereotypes arise from the straight population's view of a narrow slice of the gay community. They straight population only sees the drag queens and the gays that prefer to wear less clothing. They don't identify the normal-seeming guy at the grocery store as gay, and so they continue in their mistaken beliefs.
However, not all stereotypes arise from this view of “reality.” No, some stereotypes arise from a misinterpretation of facts and selective memory.
One excellent example of this is the stereotype that has connected homosexuality with pedophilia. This arose because sometimes, it came out that an older man was a sexual predator preying on young boys. The incidence of homosexual pedophilia is no higher than heterosexual pedophilia, but the homosexual form attracted more media attention and condemnation.
But, it was not enough to just draw attention to this form of pedophilia. The stereotype generally suggests that all gays are pedophiles instead of all pedophiles are gay. The latter interpretation, while wrong, seems more likely to arise from the situation described above. However, it was the former interpretation that has arisen as the dominate stereotype.
Why might this be? The answer lies in misinterpretation of the facts. This is an example of society committing the Affirming the Consequent Fallacy In this logical fallacy, they take the statement, “all pedophiles are gay,” and assume that “all gays are pedophiles.” Of course, both statements are ludicrous, but the latter has become an insulting stereotype that plagues the gay community.
So, how can the information about where the stereotypes come from help us combat the negative stereotypes? I believe that the stereotypes that come from “reality” can be fought by having more homosexuals out in the open.
Harvey Milk pioneered the concept that coming out would make it harder for the rest of society to ignore homosexuals and create negative stereotypes, and I support his conclusion.
The only issue is that gays that are out are still not obvious. Let's pretend I came out tomorrow, and I walked down the street. Very few people would assume I was gay. On top of that, I'm not going to bring up the topic with everyone I meet. So, even coming out does not completely destroy the stereotype.
However, that does not mean coming out is futile. It will still change the minds of many people, and this matters.
Unfortunately, I do not know how to combat the stereotypes that arise from misinterpretation of the facts and selective memory. I think that the only way to combat this would be a national organization committed to stopping the spread of lies regarding the gay community.
Question for the readers:
What do you think of this explanation about where the stereotypes come from? If you disagree, what is your alternate theory?
P.S.: The next day in the series will deal with how the stereotypes apply to the readers and myself. Some of you have already listed the stereotypes that apply to yourself, which is great. I am going to be writing about these lists and analyzing them.
11 comments:
Interesting and well-reasoned.
I agree with much of what you said. The gays who're most noticeable (and arguably make the most noise) is what the majority public sees and thus identifies as "being gay." Stereotypes always have a grounding in reality, a shortcut to what's real, but it's also wrong just as often as it's right.
And as you said, there may be a bias in the way people selectively focus on particular aspects and not others - such as the erroneous gay-pedophilia "link." It's just like how the media tends to report on positive scientific studies more so than negative scientific studies, or studies that go against the socio-cultural norm.
There's a lot of work in making the majority public see that LGBT people are just as "normal" as everyone else. But I ask, why in a culture of individuality, do people stress conformity to such a ridiculous degree? Perhaps there's danger in attempting to be "too normal" as it were.
A friend of mine who was a serious gay rights campaigner and an out young gay man, once suggested that we wouldn't have all these problems if all homosexuals were visible to the naked eye. If we all had blue noses, perhaps. Or three ears on our heads.
His argument was just like yours that if all of us gay people (some of whom would be drag queens, some would be flamboyant in other ways _ not that plenty of straight people don't do drag and plenty of straight people aren't flamboyant - but then all us 'ordinary Joes' would be visible as well.
One aspect you might care to explore is the scape-goating which exists and its affect on opinion.
E.G. HIV/AIDS 'The Gay Plague' (which, of course, it is not - in purely numerical terms of incidence).
Mind you it's not just gay people who suffer from this bullying by the majority. What about 'blacks steal our jobs'?
All good thinking stuff though - well done!
That's my cue
Yes that is also a problem too what Micky said about blacks stealing the jobs.
it's been 50 years and things have improved since the Civil Right's movement but as you can see we had a civil war back in what the 1800s? (I'm bad at history) and this is the 21st century and we STILL aren't accepted in some parts of the South.
Anyway even if the LGBT had such a large movement like the Civil Rights (which by the way would be a good idea don't get me wrong) things will still change very fast and we will be always looked down upon.
Oh yes I forgot I wanted to address that HIV/Aids that Micky said
Yes "The Gay Plague" is what it is seen know but it 10 years from now it can be seen as the "Hispanic Curse"
Since for the longest it was happening to the people in Africa (still is) and for a while people didn't want to help it wasn't until the virus started to affect people of different races that it was time to find a cure
I like where you guys are taking this discussion about integrating into the greater society and the possible benefits and dangers of that. Just so you all know, that will be my topic of discussion on Day 4.
good points
to add on to what you were saying, the "pride parade" i think is a perfect example, in it, you only see the stereostypes; the flamers, and drag queens, the old men who wear leather, or nothing at all, etc.
but you never see average, normal guys in the pride parade- even though, most gay's are average normal guys
jason
i think the major problem is like yo usaid we are being described vy a straight majority who wants to believe bad things fo rthe most part although i also cant refute that some of are are flambouyant and while its not me i dont ask them to be some thing they arent either
steroetypes of any kind are formualted to degrade a group though and where and when it started im not sure
hey how is msn coming along ? take care and be safe
bob
Good point, Tyler. Gay Pride parades are a great example. The news media always shows the picture of the guy in the leather speedo, and they always manage to crop out the guy in a t-shirt and jeans walking just a few feet away.
@CVN. I will set up the msn thing after this series is done.
We are cursed with a dominant social and religious tradition that considers same sex preferences repulsive and sinful. When a community is ostracized to that degree, it is shunned and isolated by and from the majority, and false negative stereotypes grow virally from the majority's resultant ignorance and prejudice. This has been the pattern throughout history.
So how do you combat it? Obviously that starts with education, beginning in the schools and churches. Christian tolerance is a great natural ally in this fight. The key is in the presentation. High minded straight christians can be convinced to tolerate a well-spoken and mannered gay person who reminds them that he didn't choose his or her preferences, which are inate, and that all gay people want is to live their private lifes in a manner that will make them happy. Straight familiarity with this truth will not breed contempt, but, rather, acceptance and tolerance. This process of toleration is happening already.
So now we come to what hurts the cause of gay acceptance. Straights don't want the image of gay sexual practices publically jammed down their throats. Respectible people in our society were brought up to believe that public displays of sexuality of any sort are unseemly, whether they take the form of a straight couple groping on a public transport, or a nearly nude stud in chains and leather simulating anal sex on a float in a "gay pride" parade. They don't want to be reminded of how we copulate. And they are completely turned off when a venal queen like Perez Hilton denounces and black-balls a beauty pageant contestant who has guts enough to tell them the truth about her religious opposition to gay marriage rather than be another disingenuous bimbo mouthing politically correct bromides. (While I'm on the subject of Hilton, he is the last person I would chose to represent the gay community. When he went on that maudlin public crying jag denouncing Will I Am and sporting his shiner, I wanted to bitch slap him myself.)
The point here is that the progress of acceptance will be accellerated if we collectively use our native intelligence and political cunning. As I've said on this blog before, Martin King achieved what he did by being the conscience of America. His followers won using natural dignity and non-violent tactics. But consider this: Would the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 have passed the Congress if King's movement had been led by the great black firebrand of the late 60's H.G. "Rap" Brown, and his army of arsonists and looters? Those radicals and street hustlers robbed the Civil Rights Movement of its moral authority and dignity. Outlandish or oppressive behavior by gays will do the same if the gay community as a whole doesn't call the miscreants to account whenever they get out of hand.
Anyway, that's my jeremiad on the subject.
Being gay frees us from some of the pressure to conform to masculine stereotypes. We don't have to play games in front of women, we can show our feelings more, we can more easily avoid silly macho posturing.
Freed from these pressures, some of us (like me) still blend in to the broader society. No-one guesses I'm gay unless I tell them. Other people choose to express their individuality by taking it to extremes.
The disgust many feel for "stereotypical" gays has at its heart their revulsion at basic things like the idea of men sleeping with men, anal intercourse and the like. When they see us ("normal" guys) they can safely ignore the fact that we do these things. Hopefully these attitudes will continue to change over time as new generations emerge.
In my opinion you nailed this other post. The problem with stereotypes isn't just being what most people think about gays, but they also make people who are becoming aware of their preferences even more confused, because many of them think they should "behave" like "true gays" - who don't exist at all, since everybody is different from everybody else once you consider 5 (or 10m,if you prefer) characteristics or hobbies.
Post a Comment