DWE saw a link to this website on a political blog, and it's bizarre enough that we're not entirely convinced that it isn't a spoof. If it isn't, it's equal parts disturbing and funny. Disturbing 'cause, you know, God hates queers, pop culture makes you gay, etc. Funny because of the lists of "safe music" and "gay music" (aka "music to watch out for"). I'll leave you to discover and enjoy the amusing and eclectic collection of "gay" music for yourself, and comment on just two things:
One, why is Cyndi Lauper filed among the more or less "Christian" bands as "safe"? Because let me tell you, sister, when I saw Cher in concert (yes, I saw Cher in concert...laugh all you want, but it was, as promised, the Cherest Show on Earth), Cyndi opened for her (she was excellent, by the way) and when she sang "True Colors" she brought a big ol' rainbow flag on stage and waved it around, much to the delight of the audience, which was probably 75% gay guys.
The second thing is the one that got me riled up enough to write this blog entry. One of the people on the "gay music" list is Clay Aiken. I am aware that Clay has many stereotypically "gay" mannerisms and that it is widely speculated that he is gay. However, unless I've missed something, he continues to deny that he is gay, and as you know, I don't believe that someone is gay unless they say they are, no matter how much of a homo they act like. Furthermore, Clay professes beliefs and opinions consistent with fairly conservative Christianity, including a belief that homosexuality is wrong (although he seems to take a generally tolerant, loving stance toward all people, unlike this website).
Even if Clay is gay, he's chosen either to hide it, or to live as a straight/abstinent person. If the latter is true, that's his choice, based on his beliefs, and no one has the right to call him gay or tell him to behave otherwise. He has every right to act in accordance with his beliefs, and for this supposedly "Christian" website to label his music as somehow "dangerous" because of the Hollywood gossip mill or the fact that he flat-irons his hair is totally dispicable. Clay's music and public statements generally promote values that many people identifying as "Christian" would support, and the fact that this stupid, mindless website would implicitly attack the sincerity of Clay's faith in such a careless and utterly baseless way is totally disgusting to me. (Yes, the whole website is disgusting to me, and much of the rest of the list seems largely careless and illogical, but for some reason the Clay thing really sticks in my craw.)
11 comments:
I like that Elton Joh is listed as "really Gay" it made me laugh, even if the site was a bit disgusting.
yeah, i think you just have to laugh at stuff as horrifying and ridiculous as that site. DWE and i were cracking up at the "really gay" thing too.
Oh man Jenn.... your love for Clay is pure and true. How can DWE stand up against such devotion to your one true love? ;)
Jenn:
I know you were riled up when you wrote this, but I thought I should point something out: doesn't a vehement defense against the website's identification of Mr. Aiken as gay run the risk of suggesting that homosexuality is something against which one must be defended? This seems to be further reiterated in the logic that allows you to use the homophobic ideology of conservative Christianity as a line of defense against the website's charge.
For whatever it's worth, I'm not accusing you of some sort of latent homophobia; rather, I'm pointing out that the discourse surrounding queer politics (and its ideological opposition) is incredibly convoluted, and involves a great many traps, many of which can be exploited by homophobic conservatives. Your post provides an excellent example of precisely one of the many possible missteps: while the accusation of homosexuality implicitly regards it as something "wrong," the defense against that accusation runs the risk of legitimizing, if not the accusation itself, the unreasoning "logic" that underlies it. In other words, it begins by accepting the homophobe's central precepts, when those are precisely what should be dismantled.
rebel- you know, it's your fault that i know enough about clay that i feel that i can become indignant on his behalf. YOU'RE the one who gave me his autobiography, and who can refuse a poorly written book about an attractive, loveable famous person?
N- you make a very good point, and i was aware, in some vague, inarticulate sense, that there was something very problematic about the post as i was writing it. to object to the inclusion of clay or anyone else on the list because it represents some kind of negative is to implicitly buy into the premise of the list. if i were in a band, i would be proud to have made the list (or at the least very, very entertained).
i've been thinking about this for a while now, and although i'm not entirely sure why i even care about this list or clay's inclusion on it, i think i have some idea. first of all, it bothers me when people assume that a person is gay because of his or her mannerisms, dress, speech, etc. that being gay is not a negative thing is irrelevant. i am equally opposed to someone assuming that an asian student is a high achiever or that i'm good at math because i'm an economist. so it bugs me even when gay or gay-lovin' straight people blithely assume that someone they don't even know is gay. i know that stereotypes are often accurate and/or useful, and i have certainly entertained my own share of assumptions about whether or not someone is gay. but sexual orientation is an important part of a person's identity, and i think a straight guy should be able to love showtunes and spend an hour on his hair and not have people automatically assume something inaccurate about one of the more central parts of who he is, even if they mean that assumption as a compliment or a sign of acceptance. and given the strong social pressures that both straight and gay men experience to act within their culturally-ascribed roles, i wouldn't automatically assume a straight guy is homophobic for feeling uncomfortable with being labelled gay.
the other thing about that website that pisses me off is that i don't think that a belief that homosexuality is morally wrong is inherently homophobic (although it very, very often is rooted in or accompanied by homophobia). just like my morally-motivated vegetarian friend S sits next to me, cheerful and unjudging (or at least not judging me out loud), as i chow down on dead animals, i think a person like clay can maintain his belief system but still go on the ellen degeneres show and treat her with kindness and respect. in fact, given that i think many people will continue to believe that homosexuality is wrong, that having those people behave like clay is sort of a best-case scenario, at least for the moment.
i'm still not sure why i'm so hung up on the clay thing when the whole website is obviously so ridiculous and judgemental. but it's gotten me thinking about some interesting issues (like whether the benefits of making assumptions outweigh the costs), so i guess that's good. and when it turns out that clay really is gay because stereotypes win once again, you can all mock me.
well, apparently wearing a loincloth ("ted nugent (loincloth)") or being from texas ("george michael (texan)") also make one gay, so go figure...
You're upset because you want to make sweet sweet love to Clay, and if he turns out to be gay you won't be able to do that.
Sorry DWE, but as wonderfulpants as you are - if Clay moved to San Francisco you'd be out of the picture faster than you could say "Measure of a Man". :p
(PS - Jenn you should not blame me for buying you stuff that you want!)
Jenn:
Re: your reference to “strong social pressures that both straight and gay men experience to act within their culturally-ascribed roles.” You raise an interesting point here, in reminding us that gender is a social construction. In other words, behaviors and activities are themselves gendered, identified as “masculine” or “feminine.” This is, of course, a central issue of feminism, gender theory, queer theory, etc. One way of thinking about this (though certainly not the only one, and it certainly has its problems and complications) might be to recall that gender is sometimes regarded as a performance, and to identify people who resist or defy normative constructions of gender as queer, regardless of what they do (or don’t do) in the bedroom. What I’m suggesting is that men who embrace stereotypically “feminine” behaviors might regard themselves as queer. (One important consideration here might be whether the individual in question takes up such behaviors and activities knowingly, but I’ll leave that consideration for a later date.) Hypothetically, we could, were we to take up this understanding of gender, regard someone like Clay Aiken as queer, inasmuch as his actions and behaviors trouble received constructions of gender, regardless of what or who he does in the sack.
As to whether conservative Christianity’s moralistic insistence on homosexuality is homophobic, I think it’s important to remember that sexuality is also a social construction. As such, it is policed by various institutions, each of which operates as an apparatus of social control and regulation; throughout recent history, the institutions that have regulated homosexuality have included not only the church, but psychology, sexology, and other social sciences, to say nothing of the law. In much the same way that the social construction of gender “pressures” men and women to behave in particular ways, often restricting the choices available to individuals (as has particularly been the case with women existing under patriarchy) the social construction of sexuality restricts the desires and pleasures of all individuals existing within a heteronormative society.
Strictly speaking, the church (at least in a truly secular society) has only a limited power in identifying particular behaviors as immoral/deviant/abnormal/what-have-you, in that it can only exert its power over its members. But the traces of the church’s construction of sexuality can be felt more violently when they appear in other institutions with larger concentrations of power. For example, within your lifetime, psychology could deprive someone of his/her rights through its definition of homosexuality as deviant and its ability to administer shock treatment and/or imprisonment as “cures” (even if it could only do so with the consent of the “deviant” subject). A few decades earlier, the law could do the same (and did so quite regularly, often exploiting unusual and violent crimes as excuses to round up gay men in North Beach and the Village). Hell, the law in most states still systematically refuses to legitimize certain relationships, which has a material and discriminatory impact on people’s health care status, financial stability, etc. And, what is more, conservative Christianity has been a key factor in the perpetuation of this inequality.
Now, am I saying Clay Aiken is a homophobe? No. The ideas I’m talking about aren’t especially concerned with individuals’ ideas, and if he carries homophobic ideas, I'm likely to regard him as a victim of something akin to false consciousness. But I am saying that any institution that operates as an apparatus of any social construction is oppressive, and that the oppression of homosexuals or homosexuality is homophobic, by definition.
Oops.
In the following: "As to whether conservative Christianity’s moralistic insistence on homosexuality is homophobic," please read "condemnation of" for "insistence on."
Chalk it up to either wishful thinking or need for sleep.
According to the site Oscar Wilde is a reformed homosexual, (possibly making it okay to quote him?)
Is Love Gods Way Ministries related to the Westboro Baptist Church? They seem to have a similar line.
Incidentally, are there naturalist (i.e. secular) arguments suggesting the moral wrongness of homosexuality? So far, the only "legitimate" argument of which I know is that "it says so in the bible" even though the bible says a lot of things our society just plumb ignores.
Must I make every point with a question today?
This is great info to know.
Post a Comment