Straight* women – it’s not about you
During racially charged discussions, you’ll see bitter jokes about “white women’s tears” made by people of colour. This phrase refers to the way such discussions and the importance to the marginalised group are almost inevitably derailed by the expressions of hurt feelings by people – too often women – from the majority group (usually white). It’s telling that this phenomenon is so widespread that the very expression, ‘white women’s tears’, has immediate resonance for so many people of colour.
But this derailing crap doesn’t just happen in race discussions. Take any argument about a group with less power and you will find it invaded by those from the majority who want to make the entire issue all about them and their hurt fee-fees. Men charge into conversations about women-only lesbian dance nights, white men troll black women’s blogs for daring to challenge the status quo, white women offer useless and unwanted opinions when black women want to talk about the problem of caring for black hair. The obliviousness to the fact that it’s not about them isn’t just stupid – it’s rude and hurtful.
So it has turned out to be in the discussions about changes in the Lambda Literary Awards. Straight* female authors are throwing shit fits (albeit in locked blog posts) about suddenly being excluded from an award they feel they should be eligible for as of right. Straight* readers are offering ‘advice’ to Lambda about this being a bad idea. The right of Lambda to do as it bloody well pleases is grudgingly and only partially accepted. The views of actual gay people (and minorities with relevant experience of the issues) are completely ignored.
My view on the rule change? Who the hell cares? I’m not gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered. This is not an issue about me. It’s not about straight, cis-gendered people at all. My opinion – that of any straight person – isn’t wanted, needed or invited. Even though I write about gay people and have gay friends, that doesn’t make me gay. It doesn’t give me the slightest right to butt in, demand anything or criticise Lambda.
This is a GLBT issue, for GLBT people only to discuss. GLBT people have differing – even wildly differing – opinions on the thing. No one GLBT person’s opinion has any more weight than another, no matter how loudly they shout. Nonetheless, they all deserve to be listened to respectfully by GLBT allies. GLBT allies should shut the hell up. That’s the very least we can be expected to do in such situations.
If your response as a straight* m/m writer is to whine, criticise, come out with homophobic remarks, and threaten to stop writing gay characters in response…then you’re not an ally. You’re just a whiny, entitled dickhead. The GLBT community can do without you, and so can this genre, frankly. Being an ally means being an ally all the time – not just when it suits you and wins you hugs and cuddles.
*Straight and cis-gendered to be assumed here
The op was fairly reasonable and balanced, albeit incomplete and not focused on the main reasoning and some of the comments were pretty decent and reasonable
And some make me want to hit people with a wet fish (we can has flouncing and pouting? Oh yes we can has) as well as what I’ve seen elsewhere combines together to make me want to make up a bingo card
Seriously, there are DOZENS of awards out there for people from a certain area, for different people of colour, for women etc etc. Hundreds of specialised awards for marginalised groups. this is not new. This is not radical
But some people are acting like it has been spitefully plotted against them personally (the idea that it’s been targetted against a specific title? C’MON! Get OVER yourselves already!!!)
Reply to SparkyThe blind ignorance is as depressing as blind ignorance always is. But your comments are a refreshing well of reason in a desert of irrationality.
Reply to Ann SomervilleI’ve tried to bring some sense but I think i may give up on it now. Anything I say now will be just repeating myself. I could continue by snarkily copying and pasting what I’ve written before – but if they didn’t listen the first time what are the chances of them listening now?
Reply to SparkyI agree. GLBT is a minority group. Just as we don’t complain about, say, a writing award for Asians (or women, or dozens of other minority groups, as Sparky points out), why should we complain about a writing award specifically for GLBTers? Although it means something I wrote won’t be considered by Lambda now (aawwwww), it’s their ball and they’re entitled to pick it up and take it home whenever they want.
In fact, upon reflection, I consider it a good thing. Maybe they can concentrate on nurturing GLBT writing talent now that their focus has narrowed. I’d certainly love to see extensions to the Lambda Foundation into such areas, like a Lambda “Clarion”-type workshop, for example. There are so many interesting voices to be heard and something like that would rock. Besides, there are a lot of other awards out there for GLBT fiction written by straight authors such as myself, so I’m really not sure why people are getting their knickers in a twist.
Reply to Kaz AugustinA lot of the people who get this without needing to be haddocked are those who are black or a racail minority.
Unfortunately, the GLBT people leading the screaming aren’t actually interested in their fellow traveller but want to position themselves as *the* voice for the entire genre. The reason it’s more virulent this year is that a couple of authors actually managed to snag a NY publishing deal so *of course* they should win a Lammie, even if one of them is straight and the other is bisexual only on alternate tuesdays, if it’s not politically expedient this week to be a gay man or a straight woman. She does love her shifting identities, our Erastes.
Reply to Ann Somerville“I’m really not sure why people are getting their knickers in a twist.”
When you’re in a privileged majority, you’re not used to being excluded, and like a spoiled toddler denied chocolate at the supermarket checkout, some people respond by throwing tantrums to try and get what they want.
While people in minorities are used to being excluded for all kinds of invalid reasons, so don’t have a problem with a minority creating its own exclusive space for valid reasons.
Reply to Ann SomervilleExcellent post.
I think what is so interesting about this to me is the number of “pro-gay” people who are bitching and moaning about how they aren’t appreciate and being taken care of by the GLBT people.
Straight privilege showing itself big time. And It honestly surprises me to see how many people for whom I had a measure of respect are doing it without ever realizing it.
It has certainly made me look at certain “pro-gay” people in a totally different light. As in deep down they are more worried about being rewarded than being true to their pro-gay ethics. I bet a lot of these people would be up in arms if a woman’s award suddenly opened up their award to male writers.
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.Oh, that and how many people are out there saying stuff like
“They’re saying women can’t write gay men.”
Creating issues that have nothing to do with the issue and hoping it becomes “fact” by virtue of internet telephone.
Sparky, I think you need to do that Bingo card.
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.There is so much wrong that I can’t even begin to address it all. We need a bingo card, I’m trying to think of all the squares. I think I have 24+1 free:
“I’m from an oppressed group so I don’t have heterosexual/cis privilege”
“Hypersensitive. Self-victimisation”
“Offensive stereotyping”
“But what about me!?”
“I’m an ally, where’s my cookie?!”
“Oppression of the Genre I write is totally on par with the oppression GBLT people face”
“Lesbians in straight porn is exploitive, but my m/m, plot-less sex-fest is totally ok”
“Well I won’t write ANY GBLT any more! *flounce*”
“So only elves can write fantasy then?”
“This homosexual thinks it’s stupid too so I MUST be right”
“Straight person tells GBLT person what is and isn’t offensive”
“GBLT people are discriminating against straights! You heterophobes!”
“ZOMG this is like apartheid or segregation!!!”
“Well we straight people will make our OWN award and we won’t invite the gays!”
“Acts like straights and GBLTs are equal in power”
“Comment implying being GBLT is all about who you’re having sex with”
“They’re saying I can’t write!”
“They’re only doing it to spite X author!”
“You’re being intolerant of straight writers!”
“It’s sexist!”
“It’s only because you think GBLT authors aren’t as good as straight M/M authors”
“Completely ignores the existence of awards for POC, Women, etc”
“Pandering to minorities!”
“My rights are being violated!!! What about my rights!”
Reply to SparkyAdding in the newest:
“You’re pushing straight people in the closet!”
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.I know. Sparky and I are utterly boggled by that. And when it’s a gay woman saying it…self-hatred’s a horrible thing.
So is naked ambition, unfortunately.
Reply to Ann SomervilleOh that one was a DOOOZY. I looked at it for a full 10 minutes of WTF.
Have you seen the latest? PINK TRIANGLES! I kid you not!
Reply to SparkindarknessA new one!
LLF is like the westboro baptist church!
Damn who has the arty skill to make this bingocard?
Reply to SparkyMe! I’ll make it for you!
Reply to Ann Somerville“I kissed another girl at a frat party once, is THAT good enough for you mean queers”?
Reply to Josh JasperWho or what are you quoting?
Reply to Ann Somervillegeneral quotes, for the bingo game. No one in specific.
Reply to Josh Jasperah, sorry, was being slow. Good suggestion.
Reply to Ann SomervilleOh…have to add…the rule change no one seems to have noticed that is new this year (or was it new last year, I forget…I have to see if I can find last years guidelines) is that no one can submit in more than one category. In past years you could submit to multiple categories (thus upping your chances at getting a Lammie). This year the only folks who can submit in 2 categories are Bisexual and Transgender folks. This is a wonderful thing to me as it really raises the visibility of two vastly under-represented and very important portions of our community.
Bisexual and Trans books may be submitted in their respective categories, as well as a second LGBT category. This exception is intended to bring more visibility to the most under-published segments of our LGBT community.
The rest of us being limited to one category only I think is also very good as it stops the same damn title from coming up over and over. This way people have to pick the best category for their book and let their words make the literary argument for (or against) an award.
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.Oops…no, I was wrong…these rules were in place last year. Ah well, still darn good rules, IMHO
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.That’s good – I know one legitimate complaint was (like much of the GBLT community, sadly) Bisexual and trans people were only given a token nod
I prefer 1 category 1 book – one book sweeping them all may be impressive for the book, but not so much for the goal
Reply to SparkindarknessThank you. I’m glad someone is listening.
Reply to JulesI wish there were more.
Reply to Ann SomervilleExcellent post!
Reply to DeluxThank you
Reply to Ann SomervilleExactly. Can we print it out and staple it to people’s foreheads?
Reply to DarkroseI was thinking a nail gun was more appropriate
Reply to Ann SomervilleExcellent point.
Reply to Kyle BaxterI’m kind of baffled–I don’t follow awards closely, but I thought the Lambdas were always intended to primarily promote GLBT representation by GLBT authors.
Also, wah, wah, why the hell do people care if heterosexual cisgendered authors can get Lambdas? Isn’t that kind of like being mad that white men can’t apply for scholarships for black women? Gah.
Reply to Mel“Isn’t that kind of like being mad that white men can’t apply for scholarships for black women? ”
Now that’s just crazy talk!
Reply to Ann Somerville“This is a GLBT issue, for GLBT people only to discuss. GLBT people have differing – even wildly differing – opinions on the thing. No one GLBT person’s opinion has any more weight than another, no matter how loudly they shout.”
That sounds very good, but what happens when GLBT people voice their disagreements with this change?
Reply to FlemmingThey can do so – they should do so.
Unfortunately, there’s a hardcore group of GLB people who would rather throw their fellow GLBT people under a bus because they want to consolidate power based on straight approval – and they will use any nasty sexist, racist and cisgendered privileged language or tactic to attack those (GLBT or not) who don’t agree with them.
Have a look at this post:
teddypig.com/2009/09/because-someone-asked/
And see how his critics and those who disagree with his stance are labelled as kids, not really gay etc.
There’s a limit to how much respect can be afford a GLBT’s views when they show such intense disrespect for other GLBT people. Frankly, I think the Pig, Erastes and co are behaving like the GLBT equivalent of a house negro, pandering to the privileged majority and ignoring the struggle of their peers.
Which I am not, of course, in most respects. But an arsehole is an arsehole, regardless of orientation.
Reply to Ann SomervilleI don’t think anyone is complaining that people are disagreeing – I think the complaint is the nature of the disagreements
Reply to SparkindarknessHere’s the thing, Flemming. No one is saying that GLBT who are upset and don’t agree with this rules change shouldn’t voice their opinion, write letters to LLF, withdrawl their support if they feel that strongly about it. However, evoking Hitler or Fred Phelps and comparing the LLF to them is unacceptable on any level, wether it be from GLBT people or straight people. And there are GLBT people doing this. In short, their using Dick Cheney tactics to whip up sympathy without a thought as to (a) what that does to the GLBT community or (b) how that diminshes what the people massacred at the hands of the Nazis went through. It’s childish and irresponsible and in some cases terribly cruel.
By all means, any one who disagrees with the decision, let LLF know. That is your right. But be respectful and an adult.
What will be interesting for me to see is of the GLBT people who are OUTRAGED! (note the stomping feet, the invocation of reverse descrimination or the evoking of lynching and Nazi Germany as well as the capitilazation noting bad behavior) stick with their outrage. I will be very curious to see of those who have expressed outrage and bad behavior end up on the long list of nominees. For surely if they are that outraged on behalf of themselves or their straight friends, they certainly won’t submit their novel for Lammie consideration. Or will they? I know I’ll be watching that list. And as outraged as some are, I bet you a fair number of those GLBT people outraged and eligible for submission will still show up on the long list of submissions. I’ll be very curious to see how far their outrage carries them.
I’m also expecting to see a number of people who I personally know not to be GLBT show up on that list. Because for some of them, this isn’t about GLBT rights or fair treatment. It’s all about I WANT A PRESTIGIOUS AWARD!!!!!! NOT SOME STUPID MADE-UP AWARD THAT CARRIES NO CLOUT!
Reply to Paul BensWhen GLBT people disagree, they discuss, write a letter to LLF, any number of actions. They do not go about flinging homophobic garbage as some (not you, to my knowledge) about.
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.I don’t think it’s in the cards for someone to defend homophobia on this particular issue. What seems strange to me is that on the one hand we as privileged straight people need to “shut the hell up” when listening to GLBT discuss this issue, while on the other hand we need to consider “how much respect can be afford[sic] GLBT’s vies when they show such intense disrespect”.
Reply to FlemmingPick a standard and apply it to both parties, not just the one you agree with. I believe it’s called fairness.
Look, I will listen to people speaking sensibly about what bothers them. I will not listen with respect when a person spouts racist and homophobic garbage in support of their position, whatever that position is, and whatever their orientation is.
‘Respectful’ does not mean ‘uncritical’. And when the people using these disgusting tactics are arguing allegedly in support of *non* GLBT writers – like me – I am going to tell them forcefully to fuck off. I don’t want that kind of help from anyone.
I might be straight, but I am no kind of decent human being if lifting me up involves suppressing someone else.
Reply to Ann SomervilleIt’s basic sense in response to whatever people say.
Is it a GBLT issue? Yes. Does this mean that straight people should listen to GBLT opinions? Yes
However, if someone is expressing themselves in a repellent manner, truly disrespectful and obviously objectionable then that needs to be noted. And that is a standard for both parties – and, i would hope, in general
Reply to SparkindarknessI can with some degree of confidence assert that no-one – I repeat no-one – is trying to defend or justify homophobia. At the very least, we should be able to agree on this one point.
Now, I agree with your standard that being passive in the face of injustice and discrimination carries with it no virtue. We both listen to people who speak “sensibly”. In fact, I think this is something you will find most people can agree on.
More to the point, what happens when members of the GLBT community voice their skepticism over this decision on the grounds that forced disclosure of sexuality is an inherently fucked up violation of privacy. Yes I realize what the award celebrates, and that there is an inherent lack of privacy associated with this award. Why wouldn’t an endorsement of LLA be enough? Why does one’s sexuality have to be made a public spectacle? Is it really so unreasonable to want to not share something so personal with the whole world in such a manner? Apparently.
Reply to FlemmingIf privacy is an issue, then no one is forcing someone to nominate – or be nominated against their will.
This is a classic straw man argument.
Sexuality is under the spotlight because the straight majority have put it there. Straights treat GLBT people difference purely because of their gender/orientation. We made it the issue, so the GLBT community have to deal with it.
No one who dislikes the ideas of these awards has to participate. If it wasn’t for the tantrums of a few straight women and their GLBT enablers, the Lammmies wouldn’t even be a blip on your radar, would it? So why get worked up about something that doesn’t affect you, isn’t aimed at you, and frankly, you don’t appear to understand?
Reply to Ann SomervilleSadly throughout the raging debate I’ve seen, I’ve sadly seen a lot of homophobia, a lot of defence of homophobia AND a lot of silence in the face of homophobia. And that troubles me greatly.
However forced disclosure of sexuality doesn’t seem to be an issue here
Does Lambda force you not to use a pen name? TO my knowledge it does not. Nor does it check or reveal your identity – they rely entirely on self-affirmation and identification.
If Lambda does force real names rather than pen names then those people who are afraid of being “outed” surely have a similar fear under the old rules of being outed anyway – since most people will assume (or the people who will be prejudiced against them for assumed GBLT status) that a writer to these awards was GBLT
And is it necessary to publicise that someone is gay? no but it is necessary to highly and draw attention to the work of GBLT people – or any marginalised group for that matter. Just as the Coretta Scott King Awards draw attention to authors of PoC. They don’t need to scream “LOOK THIS AUTHOR IS BLACK!!!” but they do highlight the work of those who are often silenced
Reply to SparkindarknessYou are, of course, quite right that no one is forced to nominate or be nominated against their will. You accuse me of advancing a straw man argument? Think this through.
1) Are you sure this the argument you want to go for in this discussion? Is anyone really forced to apply to certain colleges? Is anyone really forced to apply for government jobs? Probably not. Does that settle the issue for you? Oh, and before you start writing about how this is different because the presumption and context is different, think it through now. Are you really comfortable with setting up binaries where public announcements of sexuality as prerequisites of certain awards etc. are praiseworthy, whereas similar questions in work related situations are “homophobic”? If so, what is your standard for when we should praise or blame the announcement? And would the U.S. military code entertain such subtle nuances if a soldier was eligible for an award?
2) “Sexuality is under the spotlight because the straight majority have put it there. Straights treat GLBT people difference purely because of their gender/orientation. We made it the issue, so the GLBT community have to deal with it.”
None of this makes sense to me. Of course the GLBT community has to deal with the issue of sexuality in public. Who on earth would disagree with that? The issue is HOW it should be dealt with. Just because the straight majority has a proven track record of demanding public announcements of sexuality in exchange for societal recognition doesn’t mean it has to continue with opposite signifiers. That’s not “dealing with it”.
3) You’re right, I would probably not have heard of this if not for the tantrums of a few (presumably) straight women. In fact, I wouldn’t have heard of this if not for the New York Post’s outrageous coverage the unemployment rate, but that’s a different issue. That’s just how the internet works. So what? Should that mean something? Am I not entitled to voice my concern on this issue because of the way I stumbled upon this issue?
Oh, and one more thing. Please don’t concern yourself with being too frank with me. First of all your language indicates a somewhat less than academic rhetorical situation. Secondly, you are safely unable to offend me, especially regarding my “understanding”. It is interesting that you would feel a need to point out that it’s your opinion that I don’t understand the issue. You felt as if that was somehow hidden very cleverly in your post? Moreover, why should I care about gay rights in America as a straight person? Good question Ann. It’s not like it concerns me in any way right? If it doesn’t directly effect(note the e instead of the a there, it’s never too late to learn) me, why should I care? A fine point indeed.
4) You say that straight people shouldn’t “butt in” on this issue and that your opinion should not be the deciding factor. At the same time you make it abundantly clear what your opinion on this is really is. That’s fine. More power to you. You have a voice and you should share it with the world. That’s what these blogs are for. Just do everyone who engages in this public discussion with civility the favour of allowing them a voice too. If you truly care about gay rights you could fittingly start by acknowledging the diverse perspectives and backgrounds of the people you claim to speak on behalf of.
Reply to FlemmingYou cannot equate jobs and government services and accomodation with an award.
Really you can’t. That’s a gross lack of proportionality and perspective.
An award like the Lambda’s exist to draw attention to and elevate a marginalised body. To even tangentally relate it to the very real discrimination GBLT people face in employment, housing etc is inappropriate and insulting.
The Lambda awards exist to CELEBRATE GBLT authors. That is a vast distinction between those who sought (and seek) to force disclosure for the purpose of persecution. How can you celebrate, elevate, enhance and highlight the work of GBLT authors when the GBLT authors in your award will be steadily overwhelmed by the sheer number of heterosexual authors? As one person very wisely said – if 100% of the GBLT authors apply to the Lambda awards and just 11% of straight authors apply then the straight authors will outnumber us.
I do not see this as a great violation of privacy – the use of pennames, the simple fact of assumptions of anyone applying to these awards ANYWAY would largely address that
Reply to Sparkindarkness“I don’t understand the issue. You felt as if that was somehow hidden very cleverly in your post?”
No, I thought I was pretty fucking blunt about it, actually. You don’t understand the award’s purpose, or what people are talking about. Nothing hidden there at all.
“Just do everyone who engages in this public discussion with civility the favour of allowing them a voice too. ”
Which I am doing by allowing you to post unfettered in my blog. A courtesy you won’t find extended everywhere.
“If you truly care about gay rights you could fittingly start by acknowledging the diverse perspectives and backgrounds of the people you claim to speak on behalf of.”
I’m not speaking on behalf of anyone but me. And I have no idea what you’re on about. Not particularly interested either. Other readers of this post can reply to you if they wish, but your line of discussion bafffles and annoys me, and I’ve got a headache which you’re making worse. As you’re a complete stranger (though I assume this is you:
http://flemmings.livejournal.com/ )
I don’t feel I need to justify myself or my words to you. If we had some history of interaction, or you were doing more than simply posting apparently purposeless questions, it might be different.
Reply to Ann SomervilleSo, when straight people discuss “straight issues,” gay people ought to shut up and mind their own business. Correct?
How absurd.
Why should Lambda be designated as above criticism? What unique and special attributes place it beyond criticism?
Lambda, a private organization, has the right to limit its awards in any manner it chooses. Period.
Authors and other concerned people who disapprove have every right to voice their dissent and to crticise Lambda if they wish.
What part do you not understand?
Reply to HenriettaThe point, dear Henrietta, is that straight people should not act like spoiled rotten little children and throw temper tantrum and start evoking Nazi Germany in support of the “horrible, horrible” discrimination they face and think that their view is more important than that of GLBT people who face real life discrimination every day
Now head on back to Erastes’ journal dear, before someone drops a house on you.
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.I think dear Henrietta was put off by my evocation of The Wizard of Oz and thus decided not to respond. Seems our dear Henrietta was only interested in going after you, Ann. Gee, I wonder who sent her?
And I laid such beautiful bait.
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.“What part do you not understand?”
The part where you conveniently dismiss a minority group’s right to organise its own awards without interference or criticism from the opressing majority.
Your privileged arse is showing, Henrietta. Go put some pants on, and I suggest you pick up a guide to manners and learn some before before you return.
Reply to Ann SomervillePlease provide documentation of enacted law or precedent indicating minority groups have the “right” not to be criticized by dissenting individuals or groups.
Yes, I am very privileged, and I take great pride in my U.S. citizenship endowing me and my fellow citizens with certain inalienable rights as well as Constitutional rights, including freedom of expression.
Now, about those laws or legal precedents elevating minority groups above criticism…when do you plan to provide them, or will you continue making irrelevant digs at my alleged lack of manners?
Reply to Henrietta“Now, about those laws or legal precedents elevating minority groups above criticism…when do you plan to provide them, or will you continue making irrelevant digs at my alleged lack of manners?”
Nope, I’m just going to ban you. Bye bye
Reply to Ann SomervilleLOL. Henrietta sounds just like someone who has absolutely no understanding of US law.
Reply to Paul G. Bens, Jr.So, when straight people discuss “straight issues,” gay people ought to shut up and mind their own business. Correct?
Could you POSSIBLY sound more like one of the people who asks when the “straight pride” parade is going to be when someone mentions gay pride
As for having a “right” to be a jerk, sure. You do. But your failure to understand a moral right as opposed to a legal right is telling. No one has a moral right to treat people like shit, just legal rights.
Reply to Josh JasperThanks for this post, it, and your contribution to the discussion is much appreciated.
Reply to Kyle BaxterThanks, Kyle
Reply to Ann Somerville