When I started the very liberal (I think that's the term they use now) counseling program at Oakland, I was introduced to a new abbreviation. This abbreviation seems to grow exponentially over time
( Read more... )
It's interesting, but it uses the prefix "non", and I'm guessing that most will react the way Brian described above. If this has not already become the new Affirmative Action (no longer satisfied with general equality, but rather superiority), it soon will.
This makes me think of that Geico commercial with the caveman that sees the psychiatrist. P-"You wouldn't say, 'So easy, a psychiatrist could do it'. That would be..." C-"...What? Rediculous?" It's socially okay to hold deviance in the spotlight. But as soon as you turn that spotlight around, the majority reacts like the notion is, well, rediculous. I contend, why is it a double standard? Is is okay to point fingers at deviants? If so, why not the other way around, too? Why don't I identify myself as a non-gay? Why don't any of us?
Look, I don't have the answers. I'm just as perplexed by the whole situation as everyone else. My questions are honest, I promise. And they're not meant to be rhetorical- the answers are just so damn elusive.
The minority has been pointing fingers for years. It's just socially acceptable because they paint themselves as the victims instead of the instigators. I'm not saying they're NOT the victims, I'm just saying that's why it's okay.
If you wanted to, you could identify yourself as a non-gay, non-bi, non-queer, non-questioning, non-lesbian, non-transsexual, non-pansexual, etc, etc, etc. As an individual, you are a straight, just as an individual might be simply gay, an individual might be simply lesbian, etc.
The point is, when you put together an entire community whose only unifying factor is deviance from the norm, there's no good reason not to identify the community by that factor instead of making up some ridiculous acronym like LGBTQQIPSSA2SMWXYZ. Which, I noticed, even you have discarded in favor of the blanket term "The Community" - is it the only community, Brian? Am I not a member of a community? ;)
Comments 22
"Some gay/lesbian/sexually non-standard people -- and expecially perhaps in our population.."
g/l/snsp - egxspecially in the mental health field..
thought you'd like that. :)
-djS
Reply
Reply
P-"You wouldn't say, 'So easy, a psychiatrist could do it'. That would be..."
C-"...What? Rediculous?"
It's socially okay to hold deviance in the spotlight. But as soon as you turn that spotlight around, the majority reacts like the notion is, well, rediculous. I contend, why is it a double standard? Is is okay to point fingers at deviants? If so, why not the other way around, too? Why don't I identify myself as a non-gay? Why don't any of us?
Look, I don't have the answers. I'm just as perplexed by the whole situation as everyone else. My questions are honest, I promise. And they're not meant to be rhetorical- the answers are just so damn elusive.
Reply
If you wanted to, you could identify yourself as a non-gay, non-bi, non-queer, non-questioning, non-lesbian, non-transsexual, non-pansexual, etc, etc, etc. As an individual, you are a straight, just as an individual might be simply gay, an individual might be simply lesbian, etc.
The point is, when you put together an entire community whose only unifying factor is deviance from the norm, there's no good reason not to identify the community by that factor instead of making up some ridiculous acronym like LGBTQQIPSSA2SMWXYZ. Which, I noticed, even you have discarded in favor of the blanket term "The Community" - is it the only community, Brian? Am I not a member of a community? ;)
Reply
Leave a comment