sparkindarkness: (STD)

Tell me, if your Gay Best Friend is blond but dark hair would suit your ensemble better, do you change the GBF or just make him dye his hair?

I mean it’s a compelling question. Teen Vogue has just announced that GBFs are the new MUST HAVE ACCESSORY. Forget hand bags. Forget shoes – GBFs are what you need ladies! And it’s nice to see we’re training teenagers to look at us as items and things used to complete the ensemeble.

But your accessory must match, right? I mean, not every woman has an entire stable of GBFs to pull out to match every outfit – so how much must you co-ordinate your GBF with the rest of your outfit? Maybe you could shave him and have a collection of wigs?

Of course, you COULD treat that GBF as a person rather than as a sidekick or accessory – but that would be quite novel. Would you get points for being original? After all, the GBF as accessory meme is hardly new and you’d think it’d be getting tired by now

(And no, the little editors note at the bottom saying don’t objectify GBFs means bugger all after a full damn article of objectification and treating us as accessories.)

You know what? There was a fashion not too long ago to have certain dogs as accessories - little lap dogs. And people got angry because you were treating animals the same way you treated your shoes or handbag. Can we have a little of that respect please? You wouldn't treat your damn Sharpe-chiouaoua-shitzu like this

I am sick to the back teeth of it – and it’s not just in the media and the magazines. It’s real life. Whether it’s objectifying us sexually (trolling pride parades and gay spaces to see gay men kiss) or descending en mass to the local gay bar to play tourist and try to make as many of the potential GBFs pay attention to your straight self as you can. One of my favourite pubs is a no go area now because it is so saturated by straight women trolling gay men that it’s not fun.

I’ve lost count of the number of straight women I have known for 5 minutes – or less – suddenly decide I am their pocket agony uncle. Or assume that I give a damn what they’re wearing. Or believe that a few minutes casual acquaintance means I am now they’re best friend ever

And have you ever been introduced to someone as “Hey this is Sparky, my gay friend” yes, I am a gay friend. Not just a friend, not just Sparky – no, gay Sparky, it has to be known. It is clear – my sexuality is an essential part of the damn introductions now. Kind of like dropping in that your bag is Gucci and your shoes are Prada – make sure they know your “friend” is gay. Maybe I should write it on my business cards “Sparky – Lawyer and Gay BFF!”

And that’s before we get to the personal questions (which is part of a choice – you alternate between deeply personal questions and conversations where everything said is all about her and we’re supposed to nod at the right moment – maybe occasionally inserting the odd “fabulous” or shocked expression or “gurlfriend!”)

I have friends. I have female friends. I even have female best friends. And they’re friends with me not because I’m fashionable or in or an accessory – they’re not even friends with me because I’m gay. They’re friends because they like me, the person. Not me the accessory. Not me the stereotype. Not me the fashion trope. Me, Sparky – a guy who happens to be gay. Not Sparky the GBF.

H/T [personal profile] speaks

sparkindarkness: (STD)

It’s a common refrain from the liars and haters from the churches that gays are oppressing their religious freedom. Granting us basic rights will destroy their religious freedom because they will no longer be able to maintain their religious based bigotry. We’re oppressing them, truly we are. Our rights to exist and move through society will violate their dogma and that’s so terrible.

I was discussing this with Mother Janet Keefe, priest of my local Catholic Church. In particular we discussed how she was forced to marry a previously divorced Jewish couple and…

…except I wasn’t of course. Because Mother Janet Keefe doesn’t exist – because there is no Mother Janet Keefe – because female Catholic priests (at least of the more conventional Catholic church) do not actually exist. Nor are churches required to marry people who do not fit their religious definition of marriage – so a priest can’t be forced to marry someone of a different faith or marry people who don’t fit their moral code – like divorcees.

What is this? You mean that despite there being laws against sex discrimination in the UK since 1975, Churches can still discriminate against women when their dogma requires it – and despite there being laws against religious discrimination, Churches can still discriminate against other faiths if their dogma requires it? Even though the law allows divorcees to remarry, a church is not obliged to do so. My gods, who knew these stunning facts?!

So, it’s pretty much an established precedent that anti-discrimination laws end at the church doors. And that hasn’t changed in the last 25 years and isn’t likely to change in the foreseeable future. If it was we’d have female priests and imams, People of all faiths marrying in Cathedrals because they’re pretty pretty buildings and atheists snacking on communion wafers and sacramental wine. Let us be clear – no anti-discrimination or equality law in the past has FORCED churches to stop being prejudiced or to stop treating people as less. It has been 25 years and a plethora of faiths STILL treat women as second class citizens – gay rights laws aren’t going to force you  to treat us like humans either.

And while we’re on the subject:

Hate crimes laws are to protect us  from violence. They also apply across the board – if someone attacks you because you’re a cis-gendered heterosexual then the law will kick in then as well – of course that’s pretty damned unlikely to happen for which you should be eternally grateful – not whiney. While we may pretend otherwise, anti-GBLT hate crime is a severe and growing problem – we have a right to live without fear.

Hate speech does not apply to quoting your holy book of prejudiced dogma – albeit the words within it can be quite vicious. Anyone claiming this is, frankly, lying (guess that part of the holy book has been edited out?)  Hate speech means spreading lies and hate about us, hate speech means inciting violence and attacks against us. While that may be very very restrictive to what you want to do, I question why your right of religion trumps my right to live?

Discrimination laws outside the church – in matters that don’t involve your dogma, why should your dogma apply? Why should your religious laws be imposed on the rest of society – be imposed on us that they harm? And think of the can of worms you’re opening – shops that exclude Jews? Or maybe Muslims? Or any non-Christian? An easy religious excuse for not hiring women or refusing to promote them? It’s not sexism – it’s right to religion! Except it blatantly, grossly, is.

By allowing a “religious exemption” to every job, every shop, every place of business then all anti-discrimination laws are gutted – race, religion, gender, ability – it all goes out the window. All it takes is one religious excuse (and religion has been used as an excuse for bigotry against ALL of these in the past) and the discrimination is allowed. That is not right. That goes against everything we stand for as a society – and this applies doubly to you providing services on behalf of the government – why should our tax payer money subsidise hatred against us? Why should we pay taxes for the services that are then denied to us?

You can have your faith – no-one is taking it from you and no law will force it to change – no matter how prejudiced, bigoted, backward and hateful it is. We will treat you as the haters you are, but the law will not force you to respect us as people (nor, it has to be said, am I required to RESPECT YOU if you don’t respect me – no matter whether your disrespect comes from a holy book or not).

But your right to religion – and the lies you tell about it – does not give you the right to make our lives hell. You have a right to your faith, we have a right to exist and be part of this world.

Profile

sparkindarkness: (Default)
sparkindarkness

April 2015

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728 2930  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags