|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:05 pm
And their legal and social inequalities for my composition class. I have, after some thought, decided to post it here. As a forewarning, it is over three thousand words, and roughly nine and a third pages of printed text. As such I am breaking it up into two sections below. Yes, it is in small font because of how long it is. Copy-pasting works well, or if your eyes are good enough (which mine are not) you can read it directly.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:07 pm
Homosexuality: The Face of the Civil Rights Movement Today Somewhere in the United States, there is a dying man in a hospital. With him at his deathbed are his family and friends, the people he has held close to him for many years. However, there is one person missing, one person that means more to him than all the rest. His companion and soulmate, the person with whom he has shared life, is not there. However, unknown to him, his companion is in the lobby, protesting and demanding to see the dying man. The hospital staff are refusing to let the partner in. Why would this be so? Surely there cannot be a good reason to not let two lovers see each other as one is about to pass away. This is a reality for many however, because these two lovers are gay men. Not flamboyantly dressed in bright colors or clothes that would seem better fit for a woman, but gay nonetheless, and in the United States same-sex partners are, for the large part, denied hospital visitation rights (Hartman). Not because they do not love one another, but because of their orientation. Not because they are making a disturbance, but because they are not of the opposite sex. Not because they are criminals, drug addicts, or anarchists out to destroy society, but because they are just a little bit different in how they live life. This is but one example of how civil discrimination against homosexual and bisexual individuals is still a major issue in the United States today. While a few states have made advances in the push for equal rights, there is still much to be done to ensure the civil, legal, and cultural equality of this minority group and to end the bigotry against them that stems from fear, religious influences, and rather insignificant differences in how they live.
Homosexuality and bisexuality are the other two 'main' orientations, aside from heterosexuality. Homosexuality is defined as attraction to the same sex, while bisexuality is attraction to both sexes (Homosexuality), whereas heterosexuality is attraction to the opposite sex. Bisexuality is the 'middle ground', and has a bit of elasticity in definition: it may refer only to people who have had romantic or sexual relations with both sexes, or it may be used more broadly to define anyone who may “feel potentially able to have such attraction” (Rohde). All three groups are human and all three capable of the same emotions, thoughts, fears, and desires. However, some of us have seemed to have forgotten that fact. This discrimination is nothing new unfortunately; homosexuality and the pressure against it have been present since ancient times.
However, times have changed since then and such opposition to a viable lifestyle is a waste of time and human resources. Fortunately, much progress has already been made. Activism has increased greatly since the turn of the twentieth century in particular. In 1924, the Society for Human Rights effectively started the gay rights movement by becoming the first organization to advocate equality. In 1969, the movement picked up further with the Stonewall riots, following a police raid on a bar that was known to be friendly to homosexual patrons (American Gay). It has not only been in the civilian and general population that progress has been found, however. In 1962 the state of Illinois effectively legalized homosexual behavior and again twenty years later when Wisconsin outlawed the discrimination based on sexual orientation. These progressions have come with setbacks too, such as the 1993 passing of the “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” policy which forbids openly homosexual people from being in the US military and in 2008 when three states (Florida, Arizona, and California) enacted voter-approved bans on same-sex marriage. Other improvements have come from the suffering of the gay community; improved healthcare, for instance, arose from the 1980s AIDS epidemic, which hit gay men hardest.
Much of the opposition against the push for equal rights stems from two sources: religion and traditions, and homophobia and those afflicted by it. One common argument against gay marriage and the benefits conferred by marrying is that some people feel it “would weaken the institutions of heterosexual marriage and traditional families” (Homosexuality). As if that hasn't already been shown to be weakened by high divorce rates and similar broken homes. Religion often compounds this, as many religions have viewed, or still view, being homosexual as “immoral or sinful”. As such, nearly any society that is heavily influenced by religion, such as that of the United States, historically and culturally views homosexuality “as dangerous or disgraceful” (Homosexuality). This stigma is beginning to fade, though many still oppose homosexuality and the sexual behavior that goes with it. Others are mixed on the issue; that is, they “accept [it] intellectually but fail to accept it emotionally”, and “harass[ment], beating, and even killing” of homosexual people go on simply “because of their sexual orientation” (Homosexuality). Many religious and tradition-based arguments come from times far earlier than our own, when the days of modern medicine and food production did not exist and thus the main purpose in life was having a family and passing on the family name. Those times are not around anymore and therefor the arguments of 'homosexuality doesn't produce children' and 'homosexuals can't love' do not hold any validity. Life is not always about children or the ability to love anymore, not that they are any less capable of producing children (through artificial insemination, for instance) than heterosexual people are, or love their partners less than heterosexual people do.
Homophobia, however, perpetuates a slightly different argument. Many homophobes do not come from a single background religiously, culturally, or geographically. Instead, Doctor Martin Kantor likens homophobia to a symptom of an emotional disorder in how it manifests itself. One common characteristic of them is the lumping of groups together. That is, “they equate 'some' with 'all'” in their minds, or “turn similar [things] into dissimilar things”, as in his comparison between foreplay and sodomy. Because of this, he writes, they are drawn into a “vicious cycle of swirling delusion” which may end up resembling an emotional disorder (4-5). Never having looked at it this way, I found it made quite a bit of sense, since many other phobias may manifest in similar ways. Homophobia presents itself in several ways though, akin to how people may come in many shades, varying from the belief that homosexual people are sick and need treatment, to the view that they are criminals for their behavior, to the notion that they are biologically inferior to straight people (Kantor 11). Some will even go so far as to say being homosexual is a mental illness and requires treatment “with drugs, shock [therapy], ablation of parts of the brain, or [. . .] chemical or physical castration” (Kantor 13). Others will try to rationalize their phobia through sublimation, turning their hate and fear into something that appears helpful but is actually directed at changing the problem area (being homosexual) into something desirable (being heterosexual), or by feeling guilty, whether that guilt is genuine or not (Kantor 65). All in all, the homophobic argument stems from irrational methods of thinking and illogical conclusions, making their arguments and protests against gay rights invalid no matter the form.
Not all of the public is like this, however; the above represents the religious extreme conservatives and the homophobic, which are small in number by comparison to the total population. Even in the smaller communities, there can be a genuine feeling of approval, or at least tolerance of, being homosexual or bisexual. I conducted a survey of thirty-five people, ages 16 to 76, for their views on homosexuality and the results were overwhelmingly positive. 94% said that orientation has little or no effect on the ability to be professionally productive and 57% said they had a close friend who was either homosexual or bisexual. Additionally, more believed discrimination against non-heterosexual people was a continuing problem (49%) than did not (40%), and a majority (60%) believed this group is targeted as hated or biased against, which indicates the local community is still very much aware of the plight of those in the orientation minority. Much more common is the denial of civil rights through politics, legislation, or influential figures from whatever walk of life.
Political support, compared to that of the public in general, is far less. As of August 2010, only five states and the District of Columbia issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and only two more grant the right to have a civil union. Most of the remaining forty-three states (41 in total) prohibit such unions and marriage, either through laws enacted through legislation or state-level constitutional amendments (US Policies). It is not only relationships and marriage that the gay community receives opposition to. Roughly twenty states, though these laws are rarely enforce, have anti-sodomy in place. Additionally, the Supreme Court's decision in the 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick case set the precedent “for legal justification of [such] discrimination” (Homosexuality). Denial of the equality of homosexual people can be traced to other highly influential sources. Pop Benedict XVI, for example, supported the Vatican in their effort to deny such rights through the United Nations. This “effectively endors[ed] continued homophobic persecution in two-thirds of the world [thus] condemning millions [. . .] to be subjected to homophobic abuse” (Kantor 17). There have even been several attempts to amend the federal Constitution to “define marriage as the union of a man and a woman” as the Defense of Marriage Acts, put in place in 1996, have “not been fully tested by the courts”. Such an amendment “could be used to override state or local protections for same-sex couples and their children” (Hartman).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:07 pm
However, there are still a number of activists in the political climate that favor granting equal rights and protections to homosexual citizens. In 1996 and again in 2003, Justice Anthony Kennedy supported gay rights in the lawsuits brought to the courts over denial of these rights. In 2010, Judge Vaughn Walker “ruled that Proposition 8 [. . .] violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause.” He also wrote in his opinion that “Proposition 8 perpetuates the stereotype that gays and lesbians are incapable of forming long-term loving relationships and that [they] are not good good parents” (American Gay). The nation's current president, Barack Obama, also supports the gay rights movement, saying that he will “work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.” However, this movement “will require an act of Congress” to be put into action and thus could be delayed (Homosexuality) Additionally, the “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” policy, so loathed by many and instituted under Bill Clinton's presidency, started as his “intention to revoke the prohibition against gays in the military [though] it was met with stiff opposition” (American Gay). Currently, most political approval at the state level resides in the northeastern US, where all but one of the states that have approved marriage of same-sex couples are found (Homosexuality).
Science may seem helpful from the perspective of the ordinary person, but in reality, at least from the viewpoint of homosexual individuals, its attempts to be helpful by pinpointing the causes of homosexuality have met with some fierce opposition. Andrew Fink, a gay man himself, notes that science's attempt to “identify biological causes ignores individuality” while religion “depict gays as monsters trying to dismantle [. . .] society”. He further elaborates, but remains firm in that the key point right now is to create tolerance of the homosexual community, not try to find the causes of homosexual behavior and tendencies. Fink avoids attacking the people themselves however, because he states that “they don't deserve to feel how they made me feel. No one does.” He adds in the stinging point that “attempts to label us only encourage others to look at us as something less than human” and that homosexual people are “human being. Just like you.” It is likely that such studies will go on for a time as heterosexual people try to pinpoint any reason that seems to fit best so that they can rest easy knowing that the debate of causation is finally over. Interestingly, my survey showed a nearly even split, with 49% favoring genetics and 51% favoring environment (slight skewing as four people responded as both playing a near-equal role) as the primary cause of sexual behavior and orientation. At this point, however, most scientists argue for sexuality being driven by “a combination of biological factors and events at critical points in childhood”, further indicating that orientation is neither purely genetic or purely environmental (Homosexuality).
Views of lesbians and gays are varied. Nearly all (97%) of the people I surveyed feel that religion and traditions play a role in how they are viewed by the community as a whole, and the visibility of certain members of the gay and lesbian community may help to perpetuate false stereotypes. In particular, those who dress or act very flamboyant or promiscuous are the most visible, and those images being homosexual. This can even go to the point that a person believes that “all gay men are sinners, sissies, and child molesters” and that “all lesbians [should] stick to being police officers and truck drivers” (Kantor 134-35). Self-segregation may help perpetuate some of these stereotypes; for instance, most gay athletes will “self-segregate out of the macho sports and into the individual (less aggressive) sports” (Anderson and McCormack). In reality, however, homosexual people share nearly identical demographics with their heterosexual counterparts. They share similar locations of residence (24% of homosexual people residing in the top ten urban areas compared to 20% of the US population), similar levels of military service (14.02% of homosexuals compared to 17.2% of the total US population) and live in all but 22 of the nation's 3,140 counties (the population of those 22 is about 0.01% of the total US population and thus the effect is negligible).Overall, a study by the National Health and Social Life Survey concluded that roughly 5.9 million openly homosexual people lived in the US in 1994, or roughly one in fifty people at that time. A separate study found that “about 28% of lesbians and 14% of gay men have children in their household.” This means over a million homosexual people are raising children and suggests that “millions of children in America are being raised by gay and lesbian parents”, just like heterosexual parents would. Furthermore, 1990 census data shows that “individuals in same-sex couples share the racial characteristics of the general US population” (Rubenstein, Sears, and Sockloskie). That fact may help dispel the stereotype that “gay men come in [only] one color”, though “black men maintain elevated levels of homophobia” (Anderson and McCormack). This is an interesting notion since it was only fifty years ago that the black population of the US was fighting for their equality, just as the gay population is now.
Bisexuality, by contrast, is more of a gray area to get into. In several ways, being bisexual is both easier and harder than being gay. Many can “pass as straight” but some members of the homosexual community may discriminate against them for being attracted to the opposite sex much the same as some members of the heterosexual community discriminate against them for being attracted to the same sex. In addition, more myths surround bisexuality than homosexuality, including the myths that all bisexuals are confused about their sexuality or taking a step in coming out about being gay or lesbian, or that they must “have lovers of both sexes to be bisexual”. While some are indeed confused when they identify as bisexual and some are taking bisexuality as the stepping stone toward a gay or lesbian identity, many others are “absolutely certain that [they] are attracted to both sexes” while for others “sexuality is dynamic, not fixed” and that bisexuality is “not what you've done, but what you'd like to do”(Rohde). As such, personal definitions of sexuality come into play more with bisexual people than it does for homosexual or heterosexual people. Rohde also notes that many bisexual people are monogamous, just as many straight people are, and that a person doesn't have to be polygamous to be bisexual and doesn't have to be bisexual to be polygamous. In short, polygamy and bisexuality are as separate from one another as the dirt under your feet is from the air you breathe. It may seem surprising, but a 1994 study from the Harvard School of Public Health found that “20.8% of the men and 17.8% of the women admitted to [having] same-sex attraction [or] behavior at some time in their lives” (Rohde). By restricting the definition of bisexuality, though, those who are merely experimenting are not included as they do not identify with being bisexual.
As of now, one of the major steps toward equal rights is to legalize same-sex marriages, or at the least make it so that civil unions are legal throughout the nation and carries the same rights and benefits as a marriage does. The differences between the two cannot be stressed enough; Hartman notes that “the most significant difference between marriage and civil unions (or domestic partnerships) is that only marriage offers federal benefits and protections.” This means that “over 110 rights and protections” are denied to same-sex partners that cannot wed, including “Social Security benefits, [. . .] health insurance, [. . .] hospital visitation, [. . . and] family leave” (Hartman). This presents a clear inequality in the protections that these two groups have, as homosexual couples do not get a choice to refuse the benefits of marriage unless they reside in one of the states that allows same-sex marriages. Compared to our relatively slow movement in the US, several European nations and Canada have “recogniz[ed] homosexual unions” (Homosexuality). Possible methods of promoting this activism are positive visibility in the media, such as the news and through entertainment via movies or television. The nation's populace also needs to be re-educated that homosexuality isn't bad but merely different, like the color of one's hair or the styles one likes to wear. Nobody should be condemned for loving another person that happens to be the same gender they are.
The data and sources presented here are merely a small sample of what is available with regards to the movement for equality. Many steps have been taken already but there is still a great deal of room for improvement in the cause for civil and legal equality of homosexual and bisexual people. Some have made the push already, but the rest are lagging behind and further action and incentive needs to be given to finalize the fight for tolerance in the nation and to stem the tide of bigotry, whether that bigotry results from fear, religion, or simple hate because these people are different from the bigots. Start by taking charge of yourself and standing up when things are clearly not right, for denying the rights of those who are not heterosexual is condemning millions of Americans to be second-class citizens despite the fact that they contribute a great deal to society much like any other minority group. Let that dying man see his lover one last time before he passes away, for he deserves it as much as you would.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:08 pm
Works Cited “The American Gay Rights Movement: A Timeline.” infoplease.com. Infoplease, 2010. Web. 4 Oct. 2010.
Anderson, Eric and Mark McCormack. “Comparing the Black and Gay Male Athlete: Patterns in American Oppression.” Journal of Men's Studies 18.2 (2010): 145-58. H.W. Wilson. Web. 2 Nov. 2010.
Fink, Andrew. “The Causes of Homosexuality are Irrelevant.” 2008 Rpt. in Homosexuality. Ed. Auriana Ojeda. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Opposing Viewpoints. Web. 21 Sept. 2010.
Hartman, Holly. “A Primer on Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, and Defense of Marriage Acts.” infoplease.com. Infoplease, 2010. Web. 4 Oct. 2010.
“Homosexuality.” Current Issues: Macmillan Social Science Library. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Opposing Viewpoints. Web. 21 Sept. 2010.
Kantor, Martin. Homophobia: The State of Sexual Bigotry Today. Westport: Praeger, 2009. Print.
Ed. Rohde, Maggi. “FAQ – Bisexuality and Bisexuals.” msu.edu. Michigan State University, 2010. Web. 23 Sept. 2010.
Rubenstein, William, R. Sears, and Robert Sockloskie. “Some Demographic Characteristics of the Gay Community of the United States.” ucla.edu. UCLA School of Law, 2003. Web. 29 Sept. 2010.
“US Policies on Same-Sex Marriage.” infoplease.com. Infoplease, 2010. Web. 4 Oct. 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:33 am
i'll read it but i have class soon sry
the word isnt so small thought^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:39 am
Alrighty. I'm more looking for opinions since this is a rough draft. XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 2:40 am
is it a homework or something?because if it is as far as i read(nearly the first post of it) u cant show a own survey like that...u need more ppl and it get more wide...at least it is what my techear told me -.-'
and there is a relligius that explain homossexuality...it may be good to tell about it too^^dunno it's name in english but they believe in reincarnation and the homo soul was used to being the another sex and reincarnated at a body of the opposity sex...a man soul reincarnated at a womam body for example
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 3:04 am
i did it^^i finish it^^
joking aside
i admit...i thought bi ppl was going to be poligamy...i changed my mind about it some days ago when i talked with my friend about it^^...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:56 am
Actually, my professor instructed us to do a survey and said that, for academic purposes and not scientific purposes, 25 or more is plenty. If I was going to do a scientific study, I would have to have several thousand participants but this was merely field research. It was that or finding an expert in the field and that's a lot more work to me.
If you can dig up a source about that it may work but I don't really think that explanation will work because it follows stereotypes that aren't necessarily true? Unless you mean sexual attraction alone through the reincarnation theory it is also biased against through 'feminine' and 'masculine' roles.
Edit: I'm less concerned about individual things (my professor will go over those with each student) and more about the opinion of the paper as a whole. ^^;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
