Another Consequence Of Homophobia: Overcompensation?

14 06 2013

In my and other scholars’ research, the damage of discrimination to one’s health and well-being is clear.  On top of the constraints discriminatory treatment places on one’s life chances and livelihood, victims of discrimination are furthered burdened by the blow to their sense of justice and fairness, and their well-being.  It is no surprise then that so much research focuses on discrimination as a mechanism through which social inequality is maintained.

From my personal life, exercised in my professional life but not as a topic of research, I know well about the “positive” consequences of prejudice and discrimination.  I do not mean positive as in good or desirable.  Rather, I mean the consequences that otherwise would be good or desirable if they were not the product of facing discrimination or prejudice.  I mean the sense of solidarity with fellow members of one’s oppressed group, pride in one’s identity and community, and a drive to persevere and overcome adversity.

The “Gay Tax”

I know well of the “Black tax” that I and other Black people face, having to work twice as hard to receive equal recognition.  This is because Black people are stereotyped as unmotivated, unintelligent, culturally inferior, unprofessional, and immoral.  I find myself particularly concerned with how others will evaluate me and my work.  I find myself having to give a second thought to people who don’t give me a first.  It is hard for me to let trivial slights go because I refuse to be undervalued or underestimated.

In comparing how I navigate this homophobic society as a gay man to the “Black tax,” I can discern a “gay tax” that manifests as regulating (read: suppressing) my gender and sexuality.  To minimize heterosexual men’s discomfort with my sexuality, I remain physically and emotionally distant, and “man up” my gender presentation.  To dodge religious folks’ judgement, I make as little reference to my sexuality as possible.  And, as many couples do, my partner and I are rarely affectionate in public.

All at once, I am aware of these aspects of the “gay tax,” critical of them, but pay them for my safety and well-being.

Another “Gay Tax”: Overcompensation?

But there may be another aspect to the “gay tax” that is similar to the “Black tax.”  Aware of the devalued status of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people in society, some gay men have expressed through autobiographies that they throw themselves into their work to elevate their status.  Maybe, just maybe, if you are the first gay president, the world will see you just as “the president.”

In a recent study, Pachankisa and Hatzenbuehler (2013) found support for the “best little boy in the world” thesis.  In a sample of gay and heterosexual male college students, their results suggest that gay men are more likely than heterosexual men to derive their self-worth from academics, appearance, and competition.  And, the length of time that gay men remained in the closet, and the level of homophobic prejudice and discrimination in their state, were strong predictors of the extent to which these young gay men derive their self-worth from competition.

It’s the idea that young, closeted men deflect attention from their sexuality by investing in recognized markers of success: good grades, athletic achievement, elite employment and so on. Overcompensating in competitive arenas affords these men a sense of self-worth that their concealment diminishes (from NYT review).

The downside of this “positive” consequences of the stigma gay men face is their health and well-being.  Through a nine-day diary, these gay men’s focus on elevating their status (either professionally or aesthetically) predicted long periods of isolation, interpersonal problems, unhealthy eating behaviors, and emotional distress.

All Gay Men?  What About Women?

The researchers devoted a great deal of discussion to the generalizability of their findings.  With a non-random sample of gay male college students, there is reason to worry that these findings do not translate into the experiences of all gay men, particularly those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.  Further, the sample is overwhelmingly white.  So, in a blog post about the article, the lead author noted:

Importantly, like the authors of “best little boy in the world” narratives, the participants in our study were mostly white, middle class, college-educated men.  The extent to which possessing multiple stigmatized identities might shape self-worth remains to be seen, as does the extent to which this or a similar phenomenon applies to women.

In addition to assessing how other gay men (especially gay men of color, working-class gay men, older gay men), are affected by and respond to homophobia, one curiosity remains: what about women?

What about female sexual minorities, you might ask? “The notion of the ‘best little boy in the world’ crops up everywhere in stories about gay men’s early lives and not as much in the narratives of young lesbians,” lead researcher John Pachankis of Yeshiva University told me in an email. “That certainly doesn’t mean that women don’t experience a similar phenomenon, but only that lesbians’ personal stories don’t seem to emphasize it as much.” Exploring that particular question is a next step for research, he says.

Ironically, the language of “overcompensating” has been used in discussions of this study, but without explicit reference to the gendered notions of (men’s) overcompensation.  It may be the case that these young men are emasculated by homophobia, and they (like many men) have found some way to compensate in their effort to measure up to the rigid expectations of masculinity.  And, funny enough, many appear to set their sights on arenas that are not vehemently homophobic — academics and aesthetics.  Athletics, sex with lots of men, and big trucks do not seem to top the list of the things gay men wish to brag about.  So, this raises some interesting (unaddressed) questions about gay masculinity.

That’s Me!

Ah, yet another study where I, as a scholar, am humbled to reminded that I am a human, equally affected by the social world as everyone else.  In his NY Times article, federal lawyer Adam D. Chandler echoed some of these sentiments:

But seeing your reflection in an empirical study has its drawbacks. The flip side of discovering you’re not alone is the melting of your presumed snowflake uniqueness. Now I’m a statistic, another data point, just an ordinary overachieving closet case.

That’s bad enough. What’s worse is that the biography is half finished. They haven’t told me what’s on the other side of the closet door. Once I’m no longer harboring my secret, will I lose my drive? Or will my lifelong trophy hunt expand to include a search for a trophy husband?

I don’t know the answers. But I’m ready to find out.

Toward (Some Of) The Answers

Like any manifestation or consequence of oppression, a starting point is becoming aware of this drive to overcompensate.  This is yet another aspect of the homophobic reality gay men note and challenge in raising our gay consciousnesses.  And, I can provide (some of) the answers Chandler wants.

In a general sense, strong social support will help to minimize some of the distress.  And, having multiple roles or other important, ongoing tasks, events, affiliations, relationships, etc. is beneficial as well.  We do ourselves a disservice as gay men by isolating ourselves — that’s the opposite of seeking social support and others like us (as well as supportive allies).  By focusing narrowly on elevating our status, we place so much stock into too few things, leaving us vulnerable to having our entire self-worth tank when those aspects of our status do not go well.

But, more specific to gay men is a strong, positive gay identity and connection to the LGBT community that helps to buffer the harmful effects of our exposure to prejudice and discrimination.  While inevitable, how we respond to these stressful aspects of homophobic oppression can reduce their impact to our health — namely, challenging discriminatory treatment and confiding in trusted others about these experiences rather than accepting and repressing them.  And, rejecting (rather than internalizing) the homophobic prejudice and stereotypes of our society, and general self-acceptance are crucial for our well-being.  I recommend (again) Dr. Crystal Fleming‘s advice on rejecting others’ stereotypes and hatred.

The lead author of the study, a psychologist, offered the following recommendations:

Our research also reveals some important lessons for young gay men’s health and well-being.  The results of our research suggest that gay men take careful stock of the extent to which their self-worth derives from seeking status from domains like being the best, looking the best, or earning high grades or lots of money.  If gay men do recognize that their self-worth comes from those domains, they might consider the health costs of doing so.  Do they experience trouble in relationships with others, such as frequent arguing or spending lots of time alone?  Will they compromise personal values to attain status?  Are they chronically stressed or engaging in unhealthy habits, like going to the gym to an unhealthy degree or restricting their food intake?

If gay men answer “yes” to any of these questions, it will first be important to recognize that these difficulties are not personal failings and may have their source in stigma and the early lessons learned from growing up in a stigmatizing world.  Psychotherapy with a compassionate, gay-affirmative therapist can help gay men understand the legacy of experiencing early stressors like hiding one’s sexual orientation during adolescence or growing up in homophobic environments.  For many gay men, the negative effects of these early experiences may not be obvious at first, but can nonetheless be successfully addressed with supportive help from friends or professionals.

In understanding this “gay tax” as a stressor unique to gay men (similar to the “tax” that other oppressed groups face), I also recommend mental health service that treat patients who are gay as gay patients.  That is, care that understands the unique needs and experiences of gay people, rather than treating them as interchangeable with any other patient.  I strongly recommend The Velvet Rage: Overcoming the Pain of Growing Up Gay in a Straight Man’s World

Oh, and eliminating homophobic prejudice and discrimination helps, too!





Link Roundup: Equality And Diversity In Academia

13 06 2013

Later this summer, I will be joining my colleagues in sociology for our annual national conference, hosted by the American Sociological Association.  This year’s theme is “Interrogating Inequality: Linking Micro and Macro.”  I am pleased to see that this focus on inequality — really the core topic of most sociological research — includes some inward reflection, as well.  Two sessions caught my eye:

  1. “Revisiting the 2003 ASA Race Statement,” a thematic session that asks whether we should continue to examine race and ethnicity in sociological research on inequality.  Scheduled for Sunday, August 11th, 10:30am-12:10pm.  Featuring panelists Nancy Lopez, David R. Williams, Michael Omi, Lynn Weber, Felice J. Levine, Roberta M. Spalter-Roth, and Deborah K. King.
  2. “Interrogating Inequalities within Sociology,” a thematic session that “will showcase critical analysis of inequality about sociology and its effects on our paradigms, concepts, methods, and findings.”  We, as a discipline, are stronger when sociologists of diverse backgrounds and perspectives are included and equally valued.  This panel, co-sponsored by the Committee on the Status of Women in Sociology, features Alenxadra Kalev, Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Joey Sprague, Roberta M. Spalter-Roth, Rodney D. Coates, and Erin Leahey.

I have also come across a number of stories in the past few weeks on the status of equality and diversity in academia in general.





Actually, Racism Is Probably Worse Than We Realize

11 06 2013

In 2008, the argument that race has declined in importance became the crystallized “post-racial” thesis upon the election of President Barack Obama.  By his re-election in 2012, some had offered clarification that race still exists, but it is racism that has disappeared – the “post-racism” thesis.  There it sits, almost as a sense of relief — “whew, now we can stop tip-toeing around people of color, and supporting these race-related causes like Affirmative Action.”

On day 2 of George Zimmerman’s trial for the murder of Trayvon Martin, the supposed reality of post-racism contrasts with that of the hyperrelevance of race and racism.  A young Black man was killed because his race made him a suspect.

Today, Blackness is still a crime, and whites are charged with the task of policing Black people.  The harshness of law enforcement and the criminal justice system is magnified for Blacks, from the use of excessive force to longer sentences to denial of justice all together.  Even those who are not police officers, judges, and lawyers serve to police Blacks; the days of lynching Black women and men has merely evolved into a calmer form of extralegal vigilance.

For example:

My blood boiled as I watched this video.  I posted it in various places on Facebook, expecting similar outrage.  The video was widely shared, but often introduced with concerned, but surprisingly calm notes: “watch this”; “wow”; “this is messed up.”  Those were comments mostly comments from white people.

But, even some Black folks articulated concern, but little surprise.  In fact, a few people seemed to think that it was problematic that I was surprised, and that they are superior in some way for being unmoved.  The unsympathetic response of “why are you surprised?” stung, playing on my fear that I am “not Black enough” or “too white” to fully comprehend the severity of contemporary racism.  I suppose the anonymity of the internet is a dual-edged sword, where hostility is widely expressed and, absent of an in-person connection, there is little expression of empathy and solidarity.

Racism Is Worse Than We Realize

As I further processed my reactions to this video, I realized that my surprise and anger are warranted.  Yes, in the self-confident sense where I do not need to justify my feelings, or shape or suppress them according to others’ opinions.  But, also because the sheer pervasiveness and severity of racism cannot be fully comprehended by one person.  Even as a researcher, I am unable to see every instance, manifestation, and consequence of racism in every corner of the world.

Like this video, racism that hides behind seemingly race-neutral interactions, laws, and practices is harder to see, and near impossible to prove exists.  Today, we are dealing with consciously suppressed and unconscious racial prejudice — both which shape behaviors.  Few racists openly, proudly identify themselves as racists, and most racists do not even know that they are racist.

Racial discrimination, too, is harder to identify, particularly absent of outwardly expressed racial bias.  It is no longer limited to exclusion at the entry point or first contact.  The “whites only” sign has to be implied since it cannot be hung from the front door.  We may be hired, but then harassed on the job or denied opportunities to advance.  We may receive a loan, but are offered one that is economically risky.

On the ground, we cannot see other interactions to “accurately” assess whether we have been discriminated against.  (This speaks to the importance of research to look at the broader patterns!)  Like the racial profiling video above, Black people may suspect unfair or differential treatment driven by racial prejudice, but rarely can we compare the same situation experienced by a white person.  Even in some of the recent audit studies that demonstrate racial discrimination in the labor force, some of the participants were unaware of the discriminatory treatment they faced until they compared notes with others and the researchers.

In reality, racism and the pervasiveness of racial discrimination are likely far worse than we can imagine.  So, I stand by my surprise because it is a reasonable reaction to such harsh reminders of the everyday consequences of racism.  But, also because I much prefer to hope for something better than resign myself to accept the world as it is.





Multiracial People And Interracial Couples Exist. Get Used To It!

7 06 2013

How could this Cheerios commercial of an adorable biracial girl, daughter of a Black man and a white woman, spark enraged comments about “racial genocide” and Nazism?

The Cheerios commercial initially went unnoticed.  Once featured and discussed online, the company was forced to close comments on the YouTube version after receiving a flood of hostile, racist comments.  Since I am late to hear of the story, I cannot find an archive of these comments.  But, here is one:

One comment read: “They want to throw white children and coloured children into the melting pot of integration, out of which will come a conglomerated, mulatto, MONGREL class of people! Both races will be destroyed in such a movement. I for one, under God will die before I’ll yield one inch…”

Wow, it is 2013, our president is mixed Black and white, and we are still seeing references to “mullatoes” and fear of “racial genocide.”  So much for declaring America “post-racial” or “post-racist.”  As some have pointed out, the rise of social media has opened the door for more anonymous racism.

“I’m not surprised at the reaction, because social media is kind of the new Ku Klux Klan white hood,’’ TODAY’s Star Jones said Monday. “It allows you to be anonymous and to say the kinds of things that you would never say to a person to their face.”

I gagged when Star Jones mentioned the KKK!  But, she is probably right.  She goes on to say it may be a generational matter, with the younger generation more open to interracial families.  But, with the overrepresentation of young people on the web, these awful comments were (at least in part) their expression of prejudice.  Really, with all of the news of cyberbullying, we may be giving youth a little too much credit for being completely free of prejudice.

As the other guest on the TODAY show noted, there are few commercials like this.  Every once in a while, you may see a quick flash of a young, probably unmarried interracial couple (without kids).  Maybe more folks can tolerate this kind of young “experimentation,” as long as they settle down within the race.  But, to have a interracial family, with a daughter?  Gasp!  And, for such an underwhelming commercial; there is no interracial intimacy, for the Black father and white mother are not even in the same room.

I wish there would have been a similar uproar about the negative representation of multiracial people in Starburst’s commercials — the idea of being mixed as a “contradiction” akin to being a zombie or a screaming mime.  I emailed Starburst to complain and got a flippant response; so, they will probably continue airing and making those kinds of commercials.  So, c’mon Cheerios and other companies, and media in general — please keep portraying interracial families and multiracial people.  It is high time that Americans get used to seeing people who have existed as long as race has existed!





It’s Time To Talk About Fatphobia

6 06 2013

DFP SuitAs soon as my partner asked, “are you sure you want to wear that?”, I knew the body image issues would come flowing out of me.  Up to that point, I had kept them at a controllable level — like water at a slow boil, contained within the pot.  We were getting ready for our friends’ wedding.  Getting dressed up is usually a bit of an emotional roller coaster for me, so I knew to start the process off with a good sassy tune to perk up my mood.  And, if I get my look right in the first attempt, there is a good chance I am out of the door lookin’ cute and feelin’ cute.  So, when my partner raised concerns that my vest and slacks did not match, I knew that having to reevaluate would disrupt this very delicate balance of self-esteem and body image issues.  Moments later, I went back and forth between saying “I hate my body” and “fuck this fatphobic society!”

I have been fat most of my life, probably starting around age 7 or 8.  As a consequence of our society’s emphasis on thinness and, particularly for men, muscular physique, I have struggled with hating my body most of my life.  But, only in the past year or so have I grown critical of society’s prejudice toward fat people (fatphobia).  So, with this latest episode of internalized fatphobia, ending with my partner saying, “I really hate when you get like that,” I knew the time was coming to talk about fatphobia, at least with myself.

Fat Consciousness

In recent years, I have made (some) peace with my weight.  I would rather devote my energy on exercising my mind than my body, though I do know that exercising both is beneficial, and I cannot (and don’t) completely ignore my body.  I became assured enough to counter concerns raised about my weight from family members with, “it’s not me who has a problem with my weight.”  But, I am a far cry from being a proud fat person.  Unfortunately, I still retain enough of society’s anti-fat prejudice that thoughts too embarrassing to share publicly cross my mind, like “oh, I can just starve myself for a week to drop a few pounds.”  I am smart enough to snap myself out of it, but it concerns me that such thoughts still cross my mind every once in a while.

Why not be proud?  I did the heavy soul-searching, and drew on my own strength and the support of others like me to become a proud queer man.  The days of considering taking my own life as a consequence of society’s vehement homophobia were limited to my adolescence.  And, I have never hated myself for being a person of color, or even multiracial; my parents instilled a sense of racial pride and awareness from my birth.  So, why then, do I let fatphobia get to me?

One major issue has been the delayed consciousness of fatphobia.  I, like the rest of society, am only recently beginning to notice that fat people are frequent targets of prejudice and discrimination.  This is more than “innocent” teasing in the school yard.  Earlier this week, an evolutionary psychologist posted an awful comment on Twitter (see image below):  “Dear obese PhD applicants: if you didn’t have the willpower to stop eating carbs, you won’t have the willpower to do a dissertation #truth.”

Fortunately (for him), his stupidity of openly expressing his fatphobic prejudice will have little bearing on his career:

What Geoffrey Miller, a University of New Mexico professor who is a visiting professor at NYU, said on Sunday on his personal Twitter account was regrettable.  Professor Miller apologized for the Tweet and deleted it. NYU considers the matter closed.

But, the audacity to end his tweet with “#truth” — wow.  Actually, that is not true.  Several PhDs and soon-to-be PhDs have proudly submitted their names and images to a growing list of fat PhDs.

And, to add my own #truth, my fat behind sat in my chair for long hours to start and finish my dissertation (on top of applying for jobs) in a year.  To brag a little, I put my committee’s concerns to rest that I wouldn’t finish and/or wouldn’t get a job, finishing graduate school in 6 years (one year less than the typical minimum, and two less than average).  My decision to eat (rather than lack of decision or willpower not to eat) is irrelevant to my decision to work.  (I am actually a little fatter because of working on my dissertation, which is true for many people of all shapes and sizes.)  More importantly, it is high time to put to rest the stereotype that fat people are fat because they are lazy.

PhD Graduation, IU ('13)

PhD Graduation, IU (’13)

Fatphobia As A System Of Oppression (?)

I suspect a second reason that there is a delay in recognizing fatphobia is hesitation to define it as oppression.  Sure, we know that fat people are the targets of prejudice.  Increasingly, we are recognizing that fatphobic prejudice seems to translate into behaviors and, sometimes, even policies and practices.  Yup, with pervasive unfair treatment against fat people, this constitutes a form of discriminationfatphobic discrimination.  And, this discrimination has real consequences for the health, well-being, and life chances of fat people.

Beyond interpersonal interactions, there is a constant barrage of negative images in the media, coupled with the medical institution‘s obsession with obesity as a health problem.  One of the most appalling things I saw in medical research was viewing positive body image in fat women (as though they are delusional) as a problem, specifically as a hindrance to them losing weight.  Certainly perception of one’s body, specifically one’s weight, is a concern in terms of anorexia, bulimia, and other eating disorders.  However, I find it troubling to view comfort with one’s body, or even fat pride, as a problem.  For now, until we fully tease out how much of the poor health faced by fat people is the consequence of fatphobia, I remain skeptical of the automatic conflation of fatness with poor health.

But, does fatphobia constitute a system of oppression?  In simply raising the question, the “oppression olympics” come to mind.  There is no question that the history of prejudice, discrimination, and violence faced by women and people of color are what define sexism and racism as systems of a oppression.  More recent consideration has been given to homophobia and heterosexism, as well, which actually discounts just how old and pervasive they are.  But, to my knowledge, fat people have never been enslaved or formally excluded from important social institutions.

What further complicates this question is how wrapped up fatphobia is with gender (and sexism) and other identities (and systems of oppression).  I do not mean to suggest that attending to these important intersections is bad or even problematic; rather, as an outsider, much of what I have seen around anti-fatphobia activism and scholarship has donned the face of white cisgender women (for now) (but hopefully I am wrong).

Fatphobia As A System Of Oppression!

But, I stop there.  To the extent that fatphobia exists both as pervasive antipathy toward and discrimination against fat people, it counts as a system of oppression in my book.  One that deserves no less attention than sexism, transphobia, racism, homophobia, and classism.  More work is needed to document how widespread such prejudice and discrimination is, and to eliminate it (e.g., education, changing laws and policies, changing practices).  In particular, more research is needed to assess the social experience of being fat (and the extent to which this shapes one’s health), not merely obesity as a “health problem.”  And, more energy should be devoted to developing a fat consciousness and, ideally, fat pride.

It is a shame that, on top of all of the external hostility and unfair treatment, so many fat people harbor internalized fatphobia; unlike Black pride, grrl power, or LGBT pride, we, as fat people, do society’s dirty work to hate our own bodies (and even other fat people).  Okay folks!  It is time we start talking about (and working to eliminate) fatphobia.





No, Really — Where Are You From?

5 06 2013

As a part of last weeks Comedy Week on YouTube, David Neptune and Ken Tanaka took on the aspect of racism in which Asians and Asian Americans are exotified, no matter their birthplace: “no, reallywhere are you from?“  The disbelief that one’s English is “so good,” that one can be a US-born Asian.  This kind of exchange, and some of my own experiences as a multiracial person, point to 1) the obsession with categorizing people by race and ethnicity, and 2) the angry emotional reaction that arises when one’s background doesn’t fit the inquirer’s stereotypes or racial schema.  Check out the video; it’s funny because it’s not.





Margaret Cho’s “Asian Adjacent”

26 05 2013

In late 2011, comedienne Margaret Cho released a song, “Asian Adjacent” (on album “Cho Dependent”) with an accompanying video.  (Obviously, I am late to notice.)  Somehow, a humorous, yet seductive song and video offer great commentary on Americans’ obsessions with categorizing people by race and ethnicity (and all of the associated stereotypes).  This is manifest in having to place people whose races or ethnicities are ambiguous or difficult to determine.  (From Urban Dictionary: “It means someone who looks kind of Asian, and might be somewhat, but not quite there.”)   It’s pretty neat, and very catchy!

See the video below, followed by the lyrics.

“Asian Adjacent” by Margaret Cho

Do people ask you what you are
Because you eyes
and your hair are dark?
Or you’re not exactly white
But I can’t say “you’re black”

Your friends say you are polite
and the girls always got your back

I wondered what the look on their face meant
I think you are Asian adjacent

You might be a Mexican
or a Cherokee
Or perhaps you’re just a nice racial potpourri

You got one of those faces
And almond shanty eyes
You could be from lots of places
Like Alaska or Ha-Ha-Hawaii

I wondered what the look on their face meant
I think you are Asian adjacent
Asian Adjacent

You’re busy, not complacent
Is it because you are Asian adjacent?
Asian adjacent

Your immigration must be recent
You manners are so, so decent
Sometimes you speak with a slight accent

Always eternally young
You’ll never look ancient
You are racially ambivalent
Asian adjacent

I wondered what the look on their face meant
I think you are Asian adjacent (x2)
Asian adjacent

Is it because you’re Asian adjacent?
Asian adjacent

UPDATE (05-26-13 3:40pm): Margaret (@margaretcho) was kind enough to repost my tweet from this blog post on Twitter, and noted: “@grollman I love this song!  With @grantleephillips directed by @taniikeda.”  I am trying not to geek out about communicating with Margaret Cho…





On the Boy Scouts’ Homophobic and Biphobic Membership Policy

20 05 2013

gaybsa_thRegarding the impending vote among Boy Scouts of America (BSA) leaders of whether to accept gay and bisexual men and boys into its membership, one concerned troop leader noted:

The problem is, do I let my kids who are straight share bathrooms and shower houses with kids who are not? How do I divide these kids up for camps? I mean, do I put the gay kids together and then the straight kids together?

Unfortunately, because of its religious foundation, many in BSA see homosexuality as incongruent with the values of the organization.  In essence, it boils down to a moral issue.  But, opponents of an inclusive membership policy — one that no longer explicitly excludes gays and bisexuals — are doing a poor job of disentangling several components of sexuality.  The above quote seems to take issue with boy scouts’ sexual practices.  Specifically, there is concern about same-sex sexuality.  Yet, scouts who identify as gay or bisexual, regardless of their sexual practices, are excluded.  Their sexual identities are assumed to reflect same-sex sexual activity that would occur during scouting events and meetings.  That’s a bit presumptuous.

But, the slight openness to allowing gay and bisexual scouts, but not gay and bisexual scout leaders, suggests something more than the conflation of sexual identity and sexual behavior.  Across the board, gay and bisexual men are being characterized as hypersexual.  Their “open” presence is being described as something that will bring about prevalent same-sex sexual activity — and, of course, that’s bad!  OnMyHonor.net, a site devoted to opposing change to BSA’s bi- and homophobic policy, has offered an extensive list — top 10 reasons to oppose policy change, including:

Opening the Boy Scouts to boys who openly proclaim being sexually attracted to other boys and/or openly identify themselves as “gay” will inevitably create an increase of boy-on-boy sexual contact which will result in further public scandal to the BSA, not to mention the tragedy of countless boys who will experience sexual, physical and psychological abuse. BSA’s

Whoa, see that?  They went from sexual identity to sexual activity to… sexual abuse.  Ah, there it is!  Gay and bisexual boys and men are, yet again, being stereotyped as sexual predators.  Opponents’ concerns are not merely consensual sex among the scouts.  They are also fanning the flames of gay and bisexual boys who will rape other (heterosexual) boys and, the good old stereotype of gay men as pedophilesTo clarify:

Rarely does a pedophile experience sexual desire for adults of either gender. They usually don’t identify as homosexual; the majority identify as heterosexual, even those who abuse children of the same gender. They are sexually aroused by extreme youth, not by gender.  [This video is also very helpful to break this myth down.]

Who Are The Real Predators?

So, if opponents are using the exclusion of gays and bisexuals as a way to keep out pedophiles, their efforts are misguided and, frankly, lazy.  But, more importantly, I find it a repulsive twist in the perpetrator-victim dynamic.  In the debates of the inclusion of gays and bisexuals, be it the removal of exclusionary policies or a change in the climate, in various institutions — the military, athletics, education, and the Boy Scouts — gay and bisexual men are regularly characterized as a threat to heterosexual men (and boys).  Somehow, a group that reflects less than 4 percent of the US population is seen as a threat to the remaining 96 percent.

Beyond the numbers, heterosexuals are systematically privileged in ways that queer people are not.  They have more power in society.  Where is this threat coming from?

And, the reality I know as a queer man is that I have infinitely greater chance of being attacked by a heterosexual than heterosexuals do by me.  I regularly see news reports of some gay man who was severely beaten or killed in a homophobic hate crime, or a transwoman who was the victim of a transphobic murder.  Worldwide, our generally peaceful protests just for equal status in society are met with violent riots or threats of violence.  In addition to the actual perpetration of violence, many queer people live in fear of violence — the effective outcome of hate crimes across the world.

In terms of sexual violence, queer people are systematically targeted, including childhood sexual abuse, and “corrective rape” perpetrated by heterosexual men against queer women.  And, the overwhelming majority of instances of sexual violence against women are perpetrated by heterosexual men; and, those committed against men, regardless of sexual orientation, are perpetrated by straight men, as well.

So, another point of clarification is needed: sexual violence is an expression of power, not sexual desire.  By that logic, it is more likely that heterosexual men perpetrate sexual violence than, and even against, gay and bisexual men.

Concluding Thoughts

The conflation of gay/bisexual sexual identity with consensual same-sex sexual activity with sexual violence (including pedophilia) is not a concern for the well-being of (heterosexual) boys.  True concern would do a better job of disentangling these aspects of sexuality and sexual violence.  Continuing to enact homophobic and biphobic discrimination does not protect children from harm (just as excluding gay priests does not prevent sexual abuse in the church).

Rather, these concerns are about maintaining the ugly practice of excluding a marginalized group, which is more likely threatened by the majority than a threat to it.  Gay and bisexual boys are being denied participation in this otherwise positive organization.  Gay and bisexual men are being denied the opportunity to serve as positive role models, offering a unique perspective that likely still upholds the values of citizenship in BSA.  And, heterosexual boys and men are robbed of opportunities to foster positive connections with gay and bisexual boys and men, including the ideal outcome of coming to see gays and bisexuals as humans with great potential rather than deviants, monsters, or villains.  The real threat is to an older, closed-minded generation that fears that the younger generation will come to see all people as equals regardless of their sexual identity; so, they aim to prevent this by enacting exclusionary policies.

It is my hope that BSA finally takes a chance on promoting equality for a change — as a person who advocates for equality, but also a queer ex-Boy Scout.





Reflections On Self-Doubt In Academia

13 05 2013

In her latest blog post, “On Racism, Inferiority, and the Self,” sociologist Crystal Fleming reflected on the sense of inferiority that too many members of oppressed groups feel.  She notes:

What I have learned is that racism, homophobia, sexism and all other ‘isms’ only sting when we buy into the fiction that our worth is determined by what other people think of us.  When we feel pain from being stereotyped or negatively viewed, it’s because we needlessly give our power away. And at any moment, we can choose to stop doing that.

Unfortunately, even with a sense of pride in our identity and community, and the related rejection of the prejudices toward our group(s), we still experience the “sting” of such hostility:

But all it takes is exposure to a sexist or racist comment to remind us that some people think very poorly of us. And when that happens, the anger we feel might eclipse a pain we may have never acknowledged–the pain of fearing that the bigot, the chauvinist or the homophobe might be right.  Maybe there is something wrong with me. Maybe I am inferior. And even if we reject the idea that we are less than, we may nonetheless feel wounded by another human being’s searing rejection.

To get past this, she argues for further rejection of the dominant society’s stereotypes, prejudice, discrimination, and hostility:

The point is to realize that this wounded ego–this lie of inferiority–does not define you. Could never define you. You are the Witness. You are Presence. You are beyond any idea, thought or construct. And the tragicomic, hilarious truth is that you have always been this whole, perfect Being. The beautiful thing is that the truth of who You really are doesn’t depend on your state of mind, your thoughts or your level of awareness.

The Case Of Graduate School

I have made a life-long promise to myself to focus my energy as a scholar on advocating for social justice, liberating oppressed communities, and making academic knowledge and research accessible beyond the ivory tower.  In other words, I do not want to waste my energy on navel-gazing, doing research on academia, engaging in initiatives that promote academia for its own benefit.  Lately, I let myself get caught up in debates with some of my colleagues about research, but primarily from a concern of the impact research has beyond academe.  I will give myself a pass, but I do wish to return to scholarship (including blogging) that serves those outside of the academy.

In another way, I find myself reneging on this promise: reflecting on my time in graduate school.  This chapter of my life is coming to a close, and I will soon embark on the next as a professor at the University of Richmond.  So, in that regard, it makes sense that I would reflect on these past six years.  But, I also find myself reflecting, not just to myself but publicly as well, in a way that feels as though pent up thoughts are now gushing out.  Yep, it is as though I remained silent for six years, and now am releasing my tell-all book, albeit in snippets as blog posts, tweets, and Facebook posts.  Again, I do not wish to write a book on graduate school — it’s been done, and can be useful, but I prefer to devote my energy as a scholar on work that serves others more directly.

BA Graduation ('07)

BA Graduation, UMBC (’07)

Where does this silence come from?  I recently reread a letter I wrote to myself, “A Letter to an Activist,” in which I reflected on my life and upbringing, my values, and my social justice-informed agenda as a scholar.  In it, I noted that I have been outspoken, challenging stereotypes, exclusion, and silences since the age of 5.  My first attempt at activism was demanding that my kindergarten teacher explain why I could only select one racial identity on a form for school.  That multiracial activism flourished, including challenging fellow students who insisted on using the term “mulatto” (possibly a derivative of mule, implying that interracial marriage is equivalent to cross-species breeding), and participating on forums for multiracial and multiethnic people.  Not even three months after coming out of the closet, I was organizing my high school’s National Day of Silence, which also flourished into bigger activism during my time in college.

With the support and encourage of my parents to be proud of who I am, and to speak up, particularly to challenge injustice, I rarely knew silence and doubt (aside from the doubt many queer people must reject through coming out and rebuilding one’s sense of self).  I came to graduate school just as outspoken.

MA Graduation, IU ('09)

MA Graduation, IU (’09)

On one of the first days, a faculty member asked what we would do if the US reinstated the draft for military service.  (Six years later, the question still seems odd, its purpose and his agenda unclear.)  My cohort-mates, one by one, gave uncertain answers.  (Really, as a PhD student who would probably be excused, who has thought about what they would do?)  When my turn came, I offered, “even if they don’t ask, I would tell!”  My cohort-mates released a collective, unexpected laugh — as did I, feeling quite proud of myself for responding to a silly question with a silly answer (while simultaneously pointing out that I could not serve [pre-Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal] as a queer person).  These days, that bravery looks much different, less humorous, and comes after a great deal more introspection and weighing the risks of speaking up.

Yep, just days from having a doctorate in hand, I actually feel less brave, more hesitant to speak up, than when I merely had a Bachelor’s degree.  I already knew that self-doubt set in, that my voice wavers when I speak, even in casual conversations with faculty.  It became painfully obvious when, during a visit to U Richmond, my partner pointed out that I seemed strangely unsure of myself when speaking with my future colleagues.  Almost daily, he is the sole audience member to my fiery rants about various current events and controversies in academia; he sees me singing at the top of my lungs and dancing around our apartment when I’m feeling good or sassy.  So, why the heck was I talking to my future colleagues as though I was a nervous, awkward undergraduate student?  (I wasn’t even like that when I actually was an undergrad!)

PhD Graduation, IU ('13)

PhD Graduation, IU (’13)

Unfortunately, the very training that is designed to empower me intellectually has also disempowered me in other ways.  The academy’s emphasis on status, expertise, and evidence (i.e. data) has humbled me — no, it has made be carry an overwhelming sense of doubt.  Besides these emphasized values, the professional socialization of graduate training has included a repeated wearing of my sense of self as a person of color, as a queer person, as an activist.  My introduction to “the classics” of sociology included token coverage of “people like me” — one week on feminist theory (including black feminist theory and standpoint theory) in my social theory course.  New projects were often criticized for lacking a “big question” because, as I was told, merely studying the lives of queer people, or Black people, or women is not interesting to the mainstream of the discipline; there must be some broader question in order for it to be broadly relevant.  There is a deradicalization that seems inherent to this professional socialization, as well, which, at times, were made explicit — the promise to “beat the activist” out of me.

So, I hear where Crystal is coming from.  I appreciate her insight and advice.  But, I must say, we face a nearly-impossible challenge of remaining whole as scholars from marginalized backgrounds when we are systematically bombarded with messages that say we are not good enough, that we are not smart enough, that are communities are not interesting, and so on.  Arguably, all educational training is like this, though I suspect things were a bit better for me because I consistently attended diverse (particularly in terms of race, ethnicity, and nationality) schools that intentionally celebrated such diversity.  Graduate school has proved to be a different beast for me — at a Historically White College or University (HWCU), in a predominantly-white town, in a conservative state in the Midwest.

This self-doubt, a poison of which I am now painfully aware, is slowly draining out.  At the cusp of “Doctorhood,” I feel myself regaining some of the lost sense of empowerment.  I feel smarter.  I feel a bit braver.  But, it is not merely having the PhD that is returning me to my pre-graduate school sense of self.  Despite the promise to break you down to rebuild you, there is some extra beating-down that seems to occur for scholars from marginalized backgrounds, particularly if they come with activist-leanings.  So, some of this revival has been my own rejection of some of this professional socialization.  For my own survival, I have had to contextualize, distance myself from, or completely reject some of the values of (dominant, i.e., R1) academia.  It seems even Crystal has had to do some similar self-reflection to get to a better, healthier place in her career.

Concluding Thoughts

My take-away point is not to counter Crystal’s message, but rather to give a bit more context.  The dominant socialization processes, which contain values that are not completely relevant to or inclusive of members of marginalized groups, and that even devalue those groups, are enforced and reinforced systematically and through institutions.  We are bombarded with our simultaneous invisibility and hypervisibility as caricatures and stereotypes in media, in schools, in politics.  Even in academia — where “average” students of marginalized backgrounds are not being let in — our competence is questioned.  We must do the work to constantly reject these indignities, stereotypes, and hostilities; but, we (all of us) must change institutions that transmit these values and ideas, as well.  It may be time that we stop “beating” students, switching instead to a model of empowerment.  Just a thought.





Just A Different Kind Of Terrorism For America’s Scapegoats

21 04 2013

When I first heard the news about the bombings, I felt what most of the US felt: “Oh, no!  That is tragic.”  Grief for the families.  Curiosity about who did it and why.  And, concern for what this means for the country moving forward.

Then, as the media began speculating about who the suspects are, I lost interest.  I still feel the same ache in my heart for the victims and their families, and the city of Boston as a whole.  But, I was not glued to my television, computer, or Twitter account any longer.

It was in talking with my parents about the bombings that I realized why.  The speculation quickly dissolved into the guessing game regarding the suspects’ race, ethnicity, nationality, and religion.  We tried to figure out why these characteristics matter.  Ah — America needs a scapegoat.

It Doesn’t Matter

Please don’t let it be a Muslim!”  “They hardly look dark-skinned to me.”  The media and the rest of the country became obsessed.  For members of demonized groups, the suspects’ background matter because of what may come.  If this turned out to be a repeat of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the US might again overflow with racism, xenophobia, and Islamophobia.  If the suspects were Black, America might wave it’s finger and exclaim, “see, I told you Blacks are violent criminals!”

One aspect of being a stigmatized group is being treated as an indistinguishable mass.  The actions of one Latino man are treated as further proof that all Latina/os do that same act.  But, the suspects’ white racial identity end up saying nothing about whites as a group.  They are seen as individuals who acted independent of group interests or dispositions.  In fact, now that so much attention has highlighted on this double standard, efforts are being made to recast the suspects as off-white or something else all together.  We must preserve the purity of whiteness!

But, sadly, the suspects’ background actually changes nothing.  Muslims are still stereotyped as terrorists.  Black people are still stereotyped as being prone to violence and crime.  Latina/os are still stereotyped as “illegal” immigrants.  And “white people” are still comprised of unique individuals.

It Does Matter

Prejudice is a funny thing.  It is stubborn and rash.  If there were a group of people who deeply hated the color blue, they would insist that the sky is red.  Or, they might even say that they don’t see color.

Even with pictures of the two identified bombing suspects, mainstream America persisted in making this tragedy a case about international affairs, race, immigration, and religious-based terrorism.  The suspects were described in ways that either heightened the importance of race or twisted the reality of their racial and ethnic background.  Innocent bystanders and even victims with brown skin were identified by the media as possible suspects.  Some in congress have made this an issue about immigration.

The slightest infraction, then, serves to justify further demonizing immigrants, racial and ethnic minorities, and religious minorities.  Even feminists and LGBT people have been named as possible scapegoats.  Yet, this case reminds us that infractions can be created even when they do not exist.  These white suspects have given further justification for racism and xenophobia.  Huh?

And, yet again, terrorist acts are being used to terrorize minorities, ironically indiscriminately.  Any person with the slightest shade of brown skin could be subject to harassment and discrimination.  Racist and xenophobic America once again has an excuse to terrorize the minorities.

We Got ‘Em!  A Cause For Celebration

With the apprehension of the second of the two suspects after a prolonged search, Boston and much of the rest of America breathed a sigh of relief.  We got ‘em!  Pictures of people waving American flags and singing the national anthem filled my Twitter feed.  Yes, the capture of two young adult men who terrorized a major US city was certainly a cause for patriotic celebration.

Indeed, for some, this was the first major terror attack since the 9/11 attacks.  Huh?  Either we really do lack a consensus on what counts as “terrorism,” or mainstream America has a bad case of amnesia.  Or, maybe it’s just selective amnesia:

The legal, academic, and dominant cultural definitions of terrorism aside, there have been many violent attacks before and since the 9/11 attacks — acts which serve to create terror.  I am hesitant to believe that the US faces any more or less terrorism than in the past.

Beyond that,  I felt relief when the second suspect was caught, but “Ohhhh, sayyyy cannn youuuu seeeeee” was not flowing out of my mouth for two major reasons.  First, the Boston bombings do not seem all that extraordinary to me.  Look again at the (incomplete) lists of terrorist attacks that came to mind.  Such big acts of violence actually seem like a pretty regular part of life in America.  We certainly have it good (in terms of safety) compared to places where bombings are a regular occurrence.  But, for places in the US that are entrenched with regular crime and violence, I have to wonder if they were phased by the Boston bombings.  (I bet their entire city is not shut down for the frequent “manhunts” for violent criminals.)

Second, I do not feel any more or less free from terrorism following the closure to the Boston case.  The Boston bombings were just a different kind of terrorism for me.  They serve as an act that supplement the regular vulnerability to being terrorized as a brown queer person in a racist, sexist, heterosexist, and classist country.  Whether I am truly an American remains questioned, my status as a citizen is still not fully realized, and I am no more protected from violence and discrimination.  In fact, these events sparked greater possible threat to my safety and rights.

Concluding Thoughts

Sadly, that what is at stake for this case depends upon the race, ethnicity, nationality, and religion of the terrorist behind the bombings in Boston tells us that America still has a race problem.  The sense of dread that members of demonized groups felt that the suspects may be “one of their own” highlights the ease with which stereotypes are considered confirmed.  Minority groups are treated as a monolithic mass, while privileged groups continue to enjoy the luxury of individuality.  Where ever there is uncertainty, or room for doubt or speculation, mainstream America’s prejudices fill in the gaps, standing in as facts.  Such prejudices are so strong that they will not only create truths, but also alter or completely counter evidence that says otherwise.

Let’s look at America before the bombings and, now, today as the case comes to a close.  Nothing has changed.  The country still suffers from racism and xenophobia.  It’s just using a new excuse to terrorize its scapegoats: “you made me do this to you.”