BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Barbelith: 'pro-queer', 'anti-hetero' and community

 
  

Page: (1)23456

 
 
Ganesh
00:38 / 03.02.06
In some ways, this feels like an old topic but, racking my brains, I can't recall ever tackling it head-on. Not in this particular incarnation of the board, anyway. I'm inspired, obviously, by some of the comments arising from Mr Disco's citing of 'heteropanic' in a recent thread about individual turn-ons.

Olulabelle's subsequent comments pertain specifically to that thread, but touch on what is, to me, a wider issue:

I think Flyboy was right when he brought up his lost Policy post about us being 'pro-queer'. We are pro-queer, to the extent of being 'anti-hetero'.

Is that a good thing? Personally I don't think so. We're supposed to be a community. Communities have many components. Fight-starting comments based on blatant assumptions about gender without any logical explanation don't subscribe to the community feel to me.


Without wanting to revisit the 'heteropanic' thing in its entirety, do people think Barbelith is "'pro-queer, to the extent of being 'anti-hetero'"? I'm so used to this place as an online environment that I'm going to have to take time to think about this. I certainly feel more comfortable here, as a gay man, than I do on most other message-boards - but I'm not sure 'pro-queer' quite summarises it. Will return to this.

The other part of the question, I guess, would be: does Barbelith's 'pro-queer'/'anti-hetero' slant (or lack of it) impact in any way on its functioning as a community? How?
 
 
eddie thirteen
01:07 / 03.02.06
Oh, man, I'll take this. Why not continue the trend of just stomping on eggshells? Just in case any of the people I like and respect on the board still aren't convinced I suck after last week's Frank-Miller-is-the*-racist debate:

I would have to say that...sometimes...there does seem to be a wave of "humorous" backlash when certain posters, usually relative newbies, mention something in passing that hints at their heterosexuality. And there definitely seems to be a strange amount of animosity directed at quasi-famous people's wonderful, wonderful wives...more to the point, to the idea that they have wives. (Not sure why I'm using the plural here...)Honestly, I feel like this is an in-jokey kinda thing that I just don't get. I, um...get the impression the humor (is it humor?) may have something to do with the notion that said wonderful wife may be a beard, but...yeah, okay, I feel the ice cracking under my feet, so I'll just stop now.

In any event, no "hetpanic" has ever been directed at me personally, and I know I've sometimes said entirely too much about my own bland, vanilla preferences. Thankfully, I think they're so bland and vanilla that no one ever noticed me embarrassing myself, and I am quite grateful.
 
 
Char Aina
01:21 / 03.02.06
it certainly feels pro-queer.
anti-het, though... i'm not sure.
there's anti-macho sentiment kicking about which i find myself on the recieving end of occasionally(lets not get into that again here, though), and some anti-het vibes from some posters, but i wouldnt say its so common as to be a trend.
like a lot of places, bisexuals are seen as the butt of jokes in a way i dont feel that gay men(say) are. i find that a bit annoying, but that could be more about my focus than the reality of the board. perhaps you all take the piss out of gay men for their sexuality when i am not looking.

i would be interested to hear what others have to say regarding the hetpanic issue. i'd love to comment, but i feel i may have shouted a little too closely to mr disco's face on that issue. i reckon i will sit back for a bit in the hopes that ze will explain in a bit more depth why ze felt it was fair or justified to make people feel bad about saying 'girl' or similar in a thread about attraction.


and eddie?
hetpanic is done by hets, not to them.
its being used to mean panic relating to ones need to be seen as straight, not panic at the presence of hets.
 
 
Liger Null
01:28 / 03.02.06
While I think there may be kind of a double standard maintained by certain individual posters, I don't believe that said double standard is upheld by the board as a whole. This was illustrated when quite a few posters spoke up to challenge Mr. Disco on hir "heteropanic" assumptions.

I think it's a "think before you post" thing. If you don't like your sexual identity belittled or disparaged, don't do it to someone else. And don't jump to the conclusion that just because someone has certain preferences and declares them openly, that that person is somehow launching a personal attack on folks who don't share the same preference.
 
 
eddie thirteen
02:01 / 03.02.06
and eddie?
hetpanic is done by hets, not to them.


Damn, yo, I AM outta the loop. Chalk it up to me misreading this newfangled slang. I'm gonna go listen to some Guy Lombardo on my Victrola now.
 
 
Char Aina
02:13 / 03.02.06
it sure is newfangled.
i think it got invented yesterday.
 
 
eddie thirteen
02:20 / 03.02.06
It only takes one "yesterday" to make you a relic, Toksik.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
03:26 / 03.02.06
In terms of male het, there definitely seems to be an anti-macho, anti-FHM reader (a generalisation) kind of vibe going round at times, which could I suppose be interpreted as anti-het, but only if you accept that "male het" identity equals "macho FHM reader", or shares the limits of that identity, which it certainly doesn't in my case and doubtless many others.

In fact, I'd go as far as to divorce the macho I-shag-birds-lots mindset from the idea of "a sexuality" at all- it seems more like ritualised agression to me, and doesn't seem to have any kind of place as a legitimate identity in a progressive world; and as such, speaking for myself as a male het, I have no problem with macho-bashing. I certainly don't feel that it is bashing me.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
03:28 / 03.02.06
As an addendum, the Daily Mail, the Sun, Nuts, Stuff, Zoo, and the NME as it stands now could be swapped into the place of FHM in my above post.
 
 
Char Aina
03:38 / 03.02.06
I have no problem with macho-bashing. I certainly don't feel that it is bashing me.

and when they came for the macho i did not speak out, for i was not macho.

go on my son.
 
 
Char Aina
03:42 / 03.02.06
i'd also prolly be best pointing out that i think we are talking about different things.

the anti-macho vibe is probably inspired by quite repugnant characters and attitudes, but it isnt always the case that it is aimed at them.
transferrence, i believe they call it.
'its not really me you are angry with', and all that.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:39 / 03.02.06
And there definitely seems to be a strange amount of animosity directed at quasi-famous people's wonderful, wonderful wives

Support with evidence.
 
 
waxy dan
08:44 / 03.02.06
I Olulabelle.

On an aside; I think it's interesting that only a regular poster who's been here for years would have been allowed to say that though. A relative newbie or a lurker who had made the same observation would have, I think, been flamed.

It is pro-queer. This is not necessarily a bad thing; though I think it does go against (what I perceive as) the board's stated purpose to be pointedly 'pro' anything. It does also frequently cross over into being anti-male-hetero. While this does come from a relatively small number of posters; these posters being some of the most proliferous does make for a wider impression.

I think the points made by Liger Null further up are excellent btw.
 
 
waxy dan
08:46 / 03.02.06
Or 'Prolific' even... proliferous??? I'm off to get more coffee...
 
 
Shrug
08:50 / 03.02.06
Oh I kind of like the idea of Barbelith posters being proliferous.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
09:33 / 03.02.06
Are we really 'pro-queer'? Certainly a proportion of the noisiest people on here don't ID as hetero but then a proportion are/do, that's only really pro-queer in the sense the term is used by people who are against gay rights, that by having a safe-space we are 'promoting' it.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
09:38 / 03.02.06
Okay then... I do feel there sometimes can be an element of anti-hetness (Mister Disco's post, for example) but I don't think it's a trend, or a dominant feature of Barbelith. (There can also be an element of many types of bias- I pity the fool who comes on here loudly declaiming their hatred of the Smiths, for example!- but that's kind of a natural and inescapable part of any community). As has already been said, look at some of the responses to MD's post- this very thread hardly displays any type of pervasive ideology, otherwise it would be a very dull thread indeed, which for my money it isn't.

(And for the record, I don't think MD's necessarily a hetboy-hater, either- I do, however, think ze could have phrased what was actually quite an interesting point in a much less accusatory way, and possibly also have had a bit more of a look at hir own assumptions- there was serious potential there for a very interesting, friendly discussion, instead of what we actually got, which was an argument with interesting bits in).
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:49 / 03.02.06
On an aside; I think it's interesting that only a regular poster who's been here for years would have been allowed to say that though. A relative newbie or a lurker who had made the same observation would have, I think, been flamed.

But that's a fantasy - I mean, it's something you have made up, and yet your first sentence presents as a fact that somebody who had not been a regular poster for years would somehow not have been "allowed" to make this claim - which, incidentally, is a claim which comes up in various forms really fairly regularly on Barbelith.

The truth is, people are free to say pretty much what they like on Barbelith, outside som erather vague prohibitions on hate speech. Reaction to that will be affected by a number of factors, including how well someone is known and liked or trusted. So, Olulabelle can make potentially upset-causing statements about Australia being a racist nation, for example, and the response to that is managed in-thread. Likewise, MD can identify hetpanic, whether you believe him to be right or wrong in doing so, and the reaction to that is managed inthread also. I don't think that one is about race and the other about sexuality makes a functional difference.

More generally - I think it's an interesting question. First up, it's worth considering that people actually fairly rarely find themselves in environments where heterosexuality is challenged - which goes for people who are not heterosexual, as well. One of the things that I find fascinating here is how thin-skinned heterosexuals are when the assumption of heterosexuality as normative is undermined.

So, is Barbelith institutionally anti-hetero? No, I don't think so. It is a place where as a community efforts are made to cancel out some of the assumed rights conferred by heterosexuality - or more precisely heterosociality. so, if you assume, for example, that the girl who behaves in a way that suggest to you that she likes you but who has a boyfriend is a cock-tease, you're likely to be pulled up on it. Much as a warm room feels warmer if you've come in out of the cold, the removal of the unassailability of certain positions can feel like the dominance of other narratives, if you're working on the assumption that the subordination of those naratives is natural. In fact, I think Barbelith can be very _useful_ in this wise, by providing not only a way to provide alternative responses to questions like, say, The Seldom Killer's in "Genderfuck You" or Keggers in "a question for the Pride Parade people" - responses one might not be able to get from, say, one's coworkers - but also questioning the assumptions underlying the way they are asked.


Dead Megatron in the "hair on pillow" thread is quite useful on this - his suspicion that he might be the only heterosexual left (on Barbelith? On Earth?) speaks of a sense of victimhood possibly out of sync with his statistical majority - on Barbelith and on Earth.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:58 / 03.02.06
Oh, toksik, btw - I think in general the "cake-eating, fence-sitting scum" bi-mockery is satirical of prejudice against bisexuals, rather than unthinking in its repetition of that prejudice. Much like the wunnerful wife, there's a level behind...
 
 
sleazenation
10:59 / 03.02.06
I think Haus has said it at both greater length and with greater clarity than I could muster...

Pro and Anti are not useful terms here...
 
 
waxy dan
11:13 / 03.02.06
Smiths = hee hee

Haus, if it's a claim which comes up in various forms really fairly regularly on Barbelith.. is it not worth considering that there might be a kernel of truth to it?

I know any close community (such as Barbelith) is naturally going to be difficult for an 'outsider' to access. But it does go beyond that occasionally in Conversation... however, I'll apologise for going off-topic in this thread.

...

That aside (coz it really is me going off on a tangent; which is just silly of me)

MD can identify hetpanic, whether you believe him to be right or wrong in doing so, and the reaction to that is managed inthread. Well, no, it's being managed here.


environments where heterosexuality is challenged. Is it being challenged a good thing? Why does *anything* (that isn't of harm to someone else) about someone need to be challenged? I'll sound very naive in saying this; but why can't we all just get along without challenging each other's sexuality?


One of the things that I find fascinating here is how thin-skinned heterosexuals are when the assumption of heterosexuality as normative is undermined.
Support with evidence of that being apparent here. It's a generalisation that I just don't see evidenced in the thread that we're talking about.


So, is Barbelith institutionally anti-hetero?... I don't think anybody said, or even implied, that it was. I might have missed something though (I am very sleep today).
 
 
Smoothly
11:21 / 03.02.06
Olulabelle said it. We are pro-queer, to the extent of being 'anti-hetero'. And by 'we' I assume she meant Barbelith as an institution.
 
 
Smoothly
11:23 / 03.02.06
I do get the sense that Barbelith isn’t particularly interested in heterosexuality, in the way it is interested in queer sexualities, but I don’t think that's the same as being anti-het.
 
 
waxy dan
11:25 / 03.02.06
I'd like to hear Olulabelle expand on that? If so inclined.
 
 
Char Aina
11:52 / 03.02.06
I think in general the "cake-eating, fence-sitting scum" bi-mockery is satirical of prejudice against bisexuals

sure.
it starts that way, and then it becomes an in joke, and then people tend to forget why they are saying it, and then it becomes something else.
it reminds me of a pal who says horribly racist things, but its okay because he and i both know he is lampooning racists, not abusing black people.
he shat himself once when he said n*g**r in front of someone who was actually black, as that person had no way of knowing that he was being clever instead of racist.
sorta quacks the same, see.

would it be okay if i started calling all gay posters paedophiles?
i am not a homophobe, and i would of course be using it in a friendly, banter-heavy way, mocking the real homophobes who think that gay=kiddy fiddler, but i suspect that i would be laughed the fuck out of town.

i dont really think there are legions of biphobes here and
i dont want to give the impression the shit bisexuals get bugs me as much as the above would offend folks, but the principle seems the same.


I do get the sense that Barbelith isn’t particularly interested in heterosexuality, in the way it is interested in queer sexualities, but I don’t think that's the same as being anti-het.

it is a bit proqueer, though, isnt it?
i dont have a problem with that, but it would sem to be bit dishonest to pretend it isnt the case.
 
 
Smoothly
12:10 / 03.02.06
Leaving the first few paragraphs alone for a moment for fear of derailing things, I’m not sure that being interested in something is the same as being pro it, let alone whether being pro something means being anti its negation.

I’m not pretending that I don’t think Barbelith is anti-hetero, and I don’t think I’m being dishonest about anything. My point is that some people on Barbelith might be pro-queer, and others not. I don’t think there’s a culture defining number on either side. I think an interest in matters queer might qualify as culture defining (at least in certain parts of the board), but an interest is not the same as a preference.
 
 
Evil Scientist
12:10 / 03.02.06
I may be being dense here (and it's not unheard of) but wouldn't a proqueer Barbelith be advocating homosexuality as "better" than other forms of sexuality? This is clearly not the case.

Although I don't involve myself in the sexuality-themed threads myself I do occasionally read through them (purely for the articles you understand) and don't see much in the way of pro/anti feeling towards any form of consensual sexuality.

Toksik is right to suggest, however, that the harmless banter regarding bisexuals could theoretically be taken the wrong way by newcomers. Okay, those of us who read the site on a daily basis get the joke, and arguably any newcomer who has taken the time to join the boards would logically have some familiarity with the way things play here. But that is not always the case is it?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:17 / 03.02.06
Well, no, it's being managed here.

Actually, no - Olulabelle's subsequent assertion that Barbelith was pro-queer to the point of anti-heterosexuality is being managed here. However, I'm not sure what is being achieved by arguing that.

On "challenging" - well, a) lots of things are challenged on Barbelith all the time and b) I think this is rather the point - that we exist societally in a state of automatic heterosocial privilege. As such, creating an environment in which the rights of other sexualities and sexual constructions are given equal rights to the discourse is going to seem like a deprivileging of heterosociality because it is, and therefore as a challenge.

Honestly, I think you might want to either get some rest or have some coffee and come back to this one.

Toksik: I think my suggestion that your comparisons very rarely serve to illuminate questions still holds. The main difference here is that the jokes about bisexuality here are mainly being made by bisexuals. The fact that you and your friend get excited by using naughty words (and, actually, your "we know we're lampooning racists" is a rather more complex claim than it seems from the inside - some discussion here) is not comparable, I think, to bisexuals joking about the stereotypes of bisexuality that they have to deal with. I can see that if somebody got the impression that the fact that "hate bisexuals" turns up in every advice thread we have means that we actually feel that hating bisexuals is what we like to do, and jumps in on that, it could be a problem, but one it would be fairly easy to set right. Generally, however, homophobic/biphobic posters have appeared largely innocent of the content of the rest of Barbelith - qv Hawksmoor... from the Bleeding Hell, it's a Sexy Party. An Orgy - rather than egged on by it.

However, if you feel that a particular jocular reference to cake or fences is beyond the pale, I'd certainly encourage you to query it or say that it makes you uncomfortable - that's entirely reasonable behaviour.
 
 
Char Aina
12:22 / 03.02.06
an interest is not the same as a preference.

i would say i am pro animal rights because i think it is something that should be.
am i using 'pro' wrongly, or perhaps differently?
should we find other ways to discuss this?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:24 / 03.02.06
Incidentally:

Haus, if it's a claim which comes up in various forms really fairly regularly on Barbelith.. is it not worth considering that there might be a kernel of truth to it?

I think that's what we're doing here, isn't it? Considering? This is the kind of thing I mean about thin-skinned responses...
 
 
Evil Scientist
12:30 / 03.02.06
However, if you feel that a particular jocular reference to cake or fences

I for one am sick of Barbelith's pro-fence, anti-cake agenda.
 
 
Char Aina
12:32 / 03.02.06
The main difference here is that the jokes about bisexuality here are mainly being made by bisexuals.

bisexuals like ganesh?
The fact that you and your friend get excited
my friend does.
my brother's friend really, but i dont suppose that matters.
bisexuals joking about the stereotypes of bisexuality that they have to deal with.
that happens, but i dont feel that is the whole story.

Generally, however, homophobic/biphobic posters have appeared largely innocent of the content of the rest of Barbelith[..]rather than egged on by it.

i'm more concerned with a throwaway comment being read by someone who is bisexual, someone who has to deal with that jokey 'but its funny!' shit everywhere they go. to my mind that's more dangerous, as it may go unmentioned and therefore seem accepted.

However, if you feel that a particular jocular reference to cake or fences is beyond the pale, I'd certainly encourage you to query it or say that it makes you uncomfortable - that's entirely reasonable behaviour.

have done, will do, am doing.
(although the 'am doing' isnt over a particular reference, clearly)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:41 / 03.02.06
my brother's friend really, but i dont suppose that matters.

I think that proposition is substantially correct, yes.
 
 
Lurid Archive
12:47 / 03.02.06
I'm more or less with Stoatie here, though I think that "anti-hetero" is rather strong. Barbelith seems to me to be similar to other subcultures in the sense that (for some members, anyway) there is a tendency to see (a particular reading of) the mainstream as monolithic, unreflective and perhaps inferior or at least uninteresting. "What the casuals are imcompletely incapable of realising is that us goths are *all* different! But they're too busy watching the football to think."

This doesn't only happen with heterosexuality on Barbelith, in my opinion, and I think you sometimes see a similar phenomenon with politics directed towards the americans here - casual generalisations about americans and Bush, aimed at disrupting a perceived position of privilege have been the cause of occasional complaint. So while Haus points about challenging heteronormativity and the thin skinned reactions are right - I, for one, am not losing any sleep over the plight of heteros here - I think there is a sense in which these challenges can, in some isolated cases, tend toward the patronising and lazy.

So, for instance, MDs comments about heteropanic could easily be employed as a criticism of Ganesh's post to that thread, but its unlikely that anyone would do that here since Ganesh isn't part of the hetero mainstream that needs to be criticised. (That said, I think that some of MDs remarks and questions were pretty interesting, if phrased a little too confrontationally.) One might say that this double standard, if it really is one, can be justified on the grounds that it redresses external power imbalances....but I think one has to be quite careful with that line of reasoning.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:47 / 03.02.06
i would say i am pro animal rights because i think it is something that should be.

I think, again, we're in the world of unhelpful comparisons. Animal rights is a blanket term describing a number of movements with specific aims. "pro-queer" I don't think can mean anything like that, although supporting queer rights organisations may well be something that a lot of people on Barbelith do. "queer-friendly" or "protective of queer-friendly space" might make more sense than "pro-queer" here, for that reason. Again, I think the way the initial proposition is phrased is a bit difficult in terms of what it does to the ensuing discussion.

(Back on bisexuality - well, that's fair. There's actually a thread on bisexuality and the issues facing bisexuals in the Head Shop at the moment - might be worth mentioning that this is something you feel to be invasive of or damaging to bisexual identity on Barbelith.)
 
  

Page: (1)23456

 
  
Add Your Reply