The Construction of Womanhood

The ex-gay ministry was mentioned last week in class and I stumbled upon this testimony today. I'm researching the woman (an "ex-lesbian" who works for both Exodus International and Focus on the Family) who wrote it for a project and I thought the last part of her story was interesting:

"During my years of restoration, I also began to learn about this thing called womanhood. Goodness! Who knew there was so much to learn: plucking eyebrows, hair bleaches, hair waxings, facial mud masks, eye lash curlers, manicures, pedicures, push-up bras, tummy tuckers, rear-end boosters, last year’s colors, and next year’s fashions?"

In learning to be a woman (since of course being a woman and a lesbian at the same time is completely impossible), these were the most important things. It made me think of how the most threatening part of homosexuality for the boys in "Dude, You're a Fag" was the rejection of masculinity, not gay sex. Gay guys could still be popular and not be called a fag if they were the captain of the football team. Constructing a gender role for this woman was an important part of Exodus's construction of her sexual orientation. After this quote she goes on to say how she started learning about boys next. Only once she had the accepted concept of gender could she move on to the next step of sexuality. You can read the rest of her story here. Other stories on the website are called "Safe as a Woman," "Secure in my Feminine Identity," and "Finding Joy as a Woman."

oops!

sorry the video didn't upload heres the link. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFI0kxpME8w

Globalization and Homosexuality.

Last week our class looked at Globalization and its effects on homosexuality around the world. We were then asked to discuss the positive and negative consequences. At first I was having such a hard time trying to see the negative aspects, if there were any, but when I saw the new Amnesty International commercial it all kind of made sense to me. Globalization provides outlets for people who are homosexual around the world ( especially in very traditional countries), the Internet has given everyone access to people who are just like them, allowing them to seek comfort, therapy, help, and companionship. This idea goes far beyond the homosexual community but for arguments sake I'm going only focus on GLBT groups. Flooding the world with western culture, people around the world have witnessed the change in attitude towards homosexuals in the western world, these images have encourages people in eastern world to accept and fight for their sexuality more (while its still slight, its an improvement) While globalization makes the world more accessible and has played a major part in changing and correcting several injustices, and human rights violations. the negative aspects though seem to be much more damaging than anyone ever anticipated. The eastern world is made up of several non-democratic very traditional countries, this new found representation of homosexuality around the world has only fueled the fire and now homosexuals who are out in these eastern countries are not protected by any law, or law enforcement. this is creating a hostile and dangerous situation for people in the eastern world. I'm not saying that people coming out as homosexual in these countries is wrong, nor am i saying that globalization is hurting sexuality or anything like that. its just the clash of cultures is so severe that you don't really understand it until you see how dangerous it can be. being gay in America is extremely different than being gay in Russia or the middle east. Its a desperate situation, and i don't even know where to begin to propose any sort of solution, its just a scary consequence of globalization and the influence of western culture on the rest of the world.

 

Gays on TV

Two shows on television have recently added a little gay to their witty repartee. Personally, I feel like both of them speak a little to how society is viewing homosexuality, as of late.

On Miss Guided, the new ABC comedy airing Thursdays at 8, they made an obvious joke of a "Perez Hilton"-esque blog wreaking havoc on their school. Teachers were becoming obsessed with the Most-Doable Teacher rankings and they were making their sexuality more overt to up their positions. The guidance counselor came to school dressed as a tween. The vice principal saw the "gay" pictures posted so he launched a campaign to find the gossiper. And finally, with the posting of a crotch-showing shot of the guidance counselor, managed to mimic popular culture to an extreme. In the end, the gossip blogger was a homosexual male who looked JUST like Perez Hilton and went by the pseudonym Jessica Lopez. And the vice principal made him post a new entry calling him straight with the help of some "straight" pictures he had to taken - riding on a horse bareback, in leather on a motorcycle, etc. The episode ends with him looking at the new entry praising how straight he looked while his pictures obviously had a gay undertone.

It made me think...does everyone just see pictures of men in leather or other stereotypical fetish-type garments and just think gay? Is it just me? Do gay people end up stereotyping themselves? One of my friends had a visitor this weekend from home and he came out partying with us. EVERYONE was talking about how closeted he was. The next day I was asked what I thought and I found myself being like, "OBVIOUSLY HE IS GAY. He is a flaming flaming closeted gay." And I wondered to myself...did I really just stereotype us like that? Is that wrong? Am I just hindering our community more? Or is it just true that gay men tend to be more effeminate?


Secondly, on Gossip Girl, it was just announced that a straight male character will be OUTed on the new episode premiering on April 21st on the CW. A recent article cited the lack of LGBT characters on primetime television, especially on the CW. "There are a total of seven series regular LGBT characters, or 1.1%, on the five broadcast networks this season, down from 9 last season." That is a direct quote from the article found at http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3icee1422eac0ec8389421fbc853be6b5b.

Is it now becoming PC for LGBT characters to be featured in mass-marketed television shows, hence why the CW is adding their first gay series regular? If so, why are there so few LGBT characters?

"'While we acknowledge there have been improvements made in how we are seen on the broadcast networks, most notably on ABC, our declining representation clearly indicates a failure to inclusively reflect the audience watching television," said GLAAD president Neil Giuliano. "Striving toward diversity isn't merely the responsible road to take for broadcasters, but as many of television's highest-rated programs demonstrate, it's also good for business. One need only to look at the growing viewership on cable networks to see how inclusive programming can attract a wider audience.'

Indeed, LGBT representation on the mainstream cable networks is skyrocketing with 57 characters this year, including 40 regular, up from a total of 35 (regular and recurring) last year."

What do you think about these statements? Why is cable so willing to be cutting-edge and relevant while the main broadcast networks are hesitant? Obviously shows like Desperate Housewives are not dying because of the addition of homosexual series regulars. In fact, the show is on a rebound and averaging more than a million more viewers per episode than last season. So what's the big deal? Are you excited for Gossip Girl's OUTing? Is Miss Guided hindering us or are we happy with any gay coverage in the media? Are these stereotypes true?

"New Sins" Remain Old When Sexuality Is Involved

Adapting its traditional values to changing times is how the institution of the Catholic Church has held such power around the world for so many centuries. The "New Seven Deadly Sins" announced by the Vatican last week are being hailed as progressive and even many liberals can get on board with them, such as the ones that deal with social justice and the environment. Most of them don't have to do with sexuality but the ones that do don't bring the Church into the 21st century in any way. The updates did not change any stance on abortion, birth control, or any issue remotely dealing with sexuality in any way. As a result, millions of faithful world-wide are still being taught the equivalent of schools' "abstinence-only" programs in church -- and as the readings for SO240 have shown us, that actually leads to increased unwanted teenage pregnancies and STDs. It seems like the Church can change with the times to some extent to stay relevant with many issues, but sexuality is one it cannot bring itself to modernize its views on -- no matter how beneficial it would be for the health of its followers.

STDs Prevalent in Teenage Girls

CNN.com reported yesterday that 1 in 4 teenage girls have an STD, according to CDC researcher Dr. Sara Forhan. Eight hundred thirty-eight girls participated in the 2003-04 government health survey which revealed that HPV was the most prevalent STD among teenage girls, especially African-Americans. Approximately 40% of the 14-19 year old girls admitted to being sexually active; however, their definition of sex excludes oral sex, which is likely the culprit for spreading disease to sexually inactive girls. Other diseases tested for included chlamydia, herpes, and trichomoniasis.
I think that this study does more than just enlighten us about the ramped spread of STDs. It also shows the narrow perception of sex that young girls have. They do not include oral sex in their definition of sex, which could potentially expose many of them to STDs before they engage in their own definition of sex. Our sexual education programs in public schools should begin putting oral sex and vaginal sex in the same category, since they have many of the same risks. Girls should be instructed to use condoms during all sexual encounters in order to ensure their safety and promote healthy relationships.

Sally Kern's Harsh Words

Seriously, what is SO threatening about homosexuality? Part of me wonders if this woman lived during the censored times of the early 20th century and then was cryogenically frozen. Now she is spouting out this unsupported bull**** like an idiot...

When did a sexuality apparently threaten our government, community, and morals?

Thoughts?
Who elected this woman?

Ellen Speaks About California Tragedy

Last Friday, Ellen DeGeneres spoke about the eigth grade boy shot and killed by his classmate last week in California for being gay. The fifteen year old boy, Larry, had asked the shooter, Brandon, to be his valentine. Brandon felt that this request warrented Larry to be killed for his sexual orientation; in the following days, Brandon brought a gun into school and shot Larry. On her show, Ellen announced that she did not want to be political, but demanded that we have to change the message about gay men and women. The fact that Brandon thought that being another boy's valentine was so terrible that he had to kill a classmante shows that as a society we are still not sending the right message about homosexuality. Ellen encouraged the audience and everybody watching to vote for a candidate that supports equality for all so that tragedies like this will not happen ever again.
This clip from Ellen's show made me recall and interview with Mike Huckabee on The Tyra Show. Tyra Banks asked Huckabee about his view of homosexuality, to which he responded that he is tolerant of homosexuality, but does not believe that it is what men and women are meant to do. Huckabee claims that men are supposed to marry women, and the being homosexual is a deviation from the norm. Barak Obama, on the other hand, released this statement: "I'm running for President to build an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all – a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters. It's wrong to have millions of Americans living as second-class citizens in this nation. And I ask for your support in this election so that together we can bring about real change for all LGBT Americans." Obama and Huckabee's views represent those of many Americans, but hopefully the California shooting will open people's eyes to the continuing inequality in our society. So please, everyone, let your voice be heard and go vote!