Hi Epi,
As opposed to my normal MO of answering by discourse, this time I’ll be direct and respond para by para, numbered accordingly.
1--Being gay is ‘problematic’ because Proust and Proulix said so. In passing, I’m sorry that you don’t know who Charlus is. But since you probably know who Kushner is, I’ll say that, in the Spinozan sense, he’s discussed the problematic as to what the gay body can do.
2-- Are 30-year old males calling each other ‘girl’ self-hate speech? And…newsflash! Regardless of your standards of ‘self- respect’, Afro-Americans do use the N word so constantly that it does, indeed, become problematic as to whether non-Afs are entitled to the same nomenclature.
In any case, ‘hate speech’ is a legal term which, regrettably, has been co-opted by the cumbaya liberal set who, mirror-imaging the obsessive dualism of their neo-fascist counterparts, refuse to see human behavior in shades of grey.
‘Pansy’ has been known to describe the behavior of adult males who willfully use the language of 15-year old girls in public. Whether of not their sexual preference is homo, hetero, of bi is totally beside the point.
What’s relevant is that they’re willfully taking on a public persona and will be judged accordingly; but saying that a particular word indicates hate is totally ridiculous. Reasonable people understand that words have contexts, because that’s what Quine taught.
3— I totally disagree with the value of PC. IMO, its origin is that of a Fox, who employed it to lambaste those who, like yourself, take a position of hyper-cultural relativism.
Moreover, your notion of ‘goodness’ needs defining. Mine, OTH, is simple: there are no standards of ‘goodness’ with respect to privacy.
4—Again, you seem intent on placing value judgments upon normative states of affairs. For example, in Latin-based languages (plus German and Greek!), nouns are ascribed gender more or less consistent with high vs low vowel endings. Likewise, this carries over into poetic rhyme and meter scheme. In both line and color, visual art employs gender-driven terminology.
Forensics can describe gender-based features and, of course, biological outcomes are gender-driven. Yet in all cases gender distinctions fall within margins of error. Actually, all of science falls within boundary conditions and norms—even sociology!
My point here is that most of us are used to defining just about anything from normative standards. Being able to generalize and yet to admit exceptions is to conceptually walk and chew gum at the same time.
In passing, what QM demonstrates is that even the smallest of exceptions can have huge consequences. Think of how the sun works, or an MRI. In Bioscience, backflows of rivers create life along the banks.
5/6 Well, you obviously think there’s a ‘gay life’ style if you enjoy their company!
I would strongly disagree with Wiki that the essence of aestheticism is still with us. Of course, Wiki is far better at name dropping (attaching people’s names to labeled movements) than in dealing with concepts as such.
I would be pleased to discover that ‘art for art’s sake’ cannot be positively correlated with either sexual preference or a stated life-style. Nevertheless, at least with respect to Atlanta (which might differ from Sydney!) there is a stated ‘gay community here with its own self-described ‘lifestyle’.
7—Because that’s what the word means. Either sexual behavior indicates a wider range of social preferences, or not. If so, it defines a ‘style’ of life. In a sociological sense, this style issue may be seen as having several dimensions; and I feel that this is important because it helps resolve the conceptual muddle which breaks down into hopeless rhetoric.
Namely, we have ‘attitudes’ versus ‘behavior’ of the players themselves. Then we have the attitudes and behavior of self-defined straights. For example, is calling someone a ‘fag’ a prelude to treating a gay in a certain way? Advocates of the term ‘hate speech’ see an automatic connect by definition, but they are simply wrong.
Then, of course, we have closet behavior, which cross-cuts just about everything. This is why I believe that in Kushner’s work this group (person) isn’t ‘saved’. He, too, was frustrated with the analytical muddle.
8—I do not embrace diversity for its own sake. Rather, I see opportunities in the simple fact that living differently will offer alternative visions of life. However, most all of this difference is an empirical fact rather than self-defined ‘styles’—which for the most part I find repulsively stupid.
In other words, my mind is far more open to what people do, as opposed to listening to claims as to what others want to represent in their own minds.
9—On a personal note, my niece’s partner is female. Both collectively and to a person, our family’s attitude is one of happiness that she’s found love.
The son of one of my best friends has a male partner. This summer they went on an ‘alternative life-style’ cruise to Alaska, and I openly expressed disagreement as to why. In my own mind, I feel that people should integrate, and interact.
Well, the sad explanation that was offered was one simply of comfort. So it’s indeed horrible to think that people are emotively forced to segregate themselves, which is why I see the whole gay thing as a reactive negativity.
But again, if you insist that jests and jibes are the proximate enemy, and lead invariably to hateful action, then you’re simply wrong. Worse, you’ve committed an enormous political blunder, because the real enemy is bigoted silence.
BH
Hi Bill,
1--You've made some problematic statements regarding gay men, my responses to each are below:
2- 'Pansy' is hate speech. No self-respecting man would use it to describe himself(, just like no self-respecting African-American would use the N word on themselves). It attacks any male who doesn't fit the incredibly narrow notions of what constitutes mainstream male social identity (he doesn't have to be gay, though gays tend to be targeted the most), and is generally wielded by homophobes.
3- I don't know the specifics of how 'Charlus' is used but you yourself point out that it isn't politically correct. In a world practically saturated with homophobic discourse (extreme or subtle, overt or subliminal), political correctness is just what is needed so that society can get their heads around the concept that being non-hetero-normative is just as good as being otherwise.
4- Likewise, 'effeminate' is only used by people who have a problem with a male who has an non-traditional gender identity/performance. There's nothing effeminate, but thinking makes it so. We would all be wise to learn from healthy variations in men which lead them to question the rigid gender roles and innovate society. (Look up Richard Florida's Gay, Immigrant and Bohemian Indexes - these three groups are believed to either be or attract 'creative class' professionals through their counter-culture identities.)
5- There was only one Oscar Wilde, and there never will be another. According to Wikipedia, the Aesthetic Movement is said to have ended with his court case. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aestheticism] I love hanging around gay or bi men (Sydney is a good place for this hobby), and have actually never met one who identified as an 'aestheticist' (if this is the correct term?).
6- Unless you often refer to 'the straight lifestyle', please don't refer to 'the gay lifestyle'... It's a media cliche, and one that promotes the controversial stance that same-sex attracted people choose their attractions, mostly espoused by right wing conservatives who don't (believe they) know any gays.
7- Since when is homosexuality defined by what people do in their bedrooms? Homosexuality refers to a wide spectrum of emotional, intellectual and physical experiences, which include going to work, grocery shopping, playing sport, and a whole range of other activities. Yet why do people consistently reduce it to sex? Nobody would associate 'heterosexuality' with 'sex', but with a fully rounded experience. The sad thing is that homosexuals are remarkably similar to heterosexuals (if we can place people into these categories, which I feel are misleading at best).
8-Now, from your other comments it does seems that you believe in 'embracing diversity' and other pro-GLBTI equality notions, so I'd like to encourage you to open your mind further and adopt more respectful discourses towards people who identify as non-hetero-normative. It would make me happy. :o)
9-You have a point in that nobody is free of prejudice, so I've decided I will continue interacting with your emails. If you want to discuss terminology or other related issues in detail, feel free to send me an email off-list.
Epi
*
*
Film-Philosophy
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
Or visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html
For technical help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon
*
Film-Philosophy online: http://www.film-philosophy.com
Contact: [log in to unmask]
**
