Daniel 1 Bryce Daniel Ms.

Leonard Sociology 151 18 December 2013 Sexuality and Social Justice Sexuality and the issues that arise due to varying sexual identifications are relatively new in the field of sociology. Granted, the adversity that the queer community has faced is nothing new, but only in times that are more recent have activists brought the problems to center stage. Matters concerning class, race and womens rights often overshadow the problem, and with such a small relative percentage of the population identifying in a non-heteronormative manner, it takes a great deal of work to bring the movement into the light. People in the queer community face varying degrees of oppression that range from being bullied in the classroom to harsh treatment from employers. According to data collected from the Human Rights Campaign, it is legal in 29 states for a company to fire an employee solely because they are gay. The number jumps to 34 if the employee is transgender. Compare those numbers to the 16 states that allow same-sex marriages and the difference is startling. These numbers show that despite any progress being made in terms of the queer rights movement, we still have a long way to go. It also makes me wonder if the queer community and its allies are going about solving the problem in the wrong way. For a while, the focus was on marriage alone. However, the right to get married will not solve any of the other problems. It will not change the fact that a company can discriminate based on sexual orientation. A group of queer-identifying individuals got together to propose the next step in the movement; in their declaration, Beyond Same-Sex Marriage, they argue that while marriage for the Q+ (Formerly LGBTQIA, see page 7) community is important, it is not the only thing that we should focus on. Furthermore, they make it clear that we should seek access to a flexible set of economic benefits and

Daniel 2 options regardless of sexual orientation, race, gender/gender identity, class or citizenship status (Beyond 1). By making the issue no longer about sexual-orientation, but rather a national issue of equality, the movement would gain support from a larger group of collective minorities. In this generation, the nuclear family is not as prominent as much as it once was, and in addition to families that include a same-sex couple, there are a wide variety of relationship types. The struggle for samesex marriage rights is only one part of a larger effort to strengthen the security and stability of diverse households and families. Now families and relationships know no borders and will never slot narrowly into a single existing template (Beyond 1). One of the things that the Q+ movement does is play an instrumental role in the creation of and advocating for alternative relationships. Domestic partnerships, second parent adoptions, reciprocal beneficiary arrangements, joint tenancy/home-ownership contracts, health care proxies, powers of attorney, and other mechanisms that help provide stability and security for lesbian, gay, bisexual and heterosexual individuals and families also apply to heterosexuals as well; the promotion from the queer community has made these unconventional lifestyles more prominent (Beyond 2). The writers in Beyond Same-Sex Marriage also iterate that Marriage is not the only worthy form of family or relationships, and it should not be legally and economically privileged above all others (Beyond 2). The rights of an individual should be no different solely based on whom a person loves or the type of relationship they form. If the gay rights movement were to shift to a broader approach, rather than zeroing in on marriage, we might see a more widespread infrastructural change. It is clear to most that the Q+ community must push for equality and the same rights as their heterosexual counterparts. The problem is that the construction of gender norms and sexuality in society is widespread and ingrained into the minds of the young at an early age. The locker room is a classroom and the football field a training camp for masculinity. Coaches and adult male role models continue to teach boys how to be men and more masculine, by defining stereotypes and emphasizing the importance of not being feminine. For instance, a common phrase heard on the field is stop

Daniel 3 throwing like a girl (Just Sex). The problem with this, besides being sexist and degrading towards women, is that it expects all males to be more physically adept at sports and more coordinated than females. This however is simply not true. In my own experience, I found that I could not throw as well as my heterosexual friends and there were women who could certainly swim faster than me on my high school team. Similarly, I lacked interest in most manly sport altogether. Whether this stereotypical behavior is innate or it manifested itself because I was trying to fit in with the queer community, I am not sure. Regardless, I found that coaches and even my father expected me to throw as a man should, and when a baseball him me, to take it like a man. When individuals speak like this, they hinder a childs sexual development and they cause confusion in the childs mind about their identity. The idea that men must be good at sports is a social construct that society takes as fact, which in turn causes grief among the young queer community. Beyond the workplace or sports field, queer-identified individuals are marginalized and fall victim to the structural injustice. In a system that privileges maleness, the default is never to do anything that might make men feel challenged or uncomfortable as men, meaning everyone else is left tiptoeing around the issues. It is expected, of course, to routinely draw attention to male and white and nondisabled and heterosexual peopleBut that differs from drawing attention to male, heterosexual, or white as social categories that are problematic (Johnson 122). Rarely do we see negative attention given to the defaults because the majorities are generally the ones putting minorities in a dark light. For instance, when the Aids epidemic was affecting primarily gays, particularly those of black or Latino decent, the government was slow to respond. Many suggested that they should tattoo, or essentially brand, those infected with the disease. However, had this disease spread rapidly among white, heterosexual men, there would have been a much quicker response. It is also important to keep in mind that oppression is not a matter of individual prejudice cases. Isms including heterosexism are also more than personal expressions of hostility or prejudice but include everything that people do or dont

Daniel 4 do that promotes those forms of privilege (Johnson 105). It is when an issue becomes this widespread and it no longer only affects the individual that it becomes a social justice issue. According to Johnson, The greatest barrier to change is that the dominant groupsdont see the trouble as their trouble, which means they dont feel obliged to do something about it (Johnson 127). Whether it is class, race, or sexuality, the majority tends to lump the oppressed together and title the problem as their issue. Similarly, we fall under the idea that if something is a certain way now, then it always has and always will be. The problem with this is that if you look back a few decades, you will see that there was a time when African Americans and women were both treated as second-class citizens. Though there are certainly issues that persist, we have come a long way in furthering the rights of all Americans. It would be foolish to think that the same progress that was made, will not repeat itself. If we as a society do not make, a point of studying history, its easy to slide into the belief that things have always been the way weve known them to be (Johnson 128). The fact of the matter is regardless of whether or not the majority wants it to, or the minority thinks it will never happen, social systems are fluid, and things can change (Johnson 129). In the face of so much adversity, there is always a solution. Being queer-identifying and an openly gay male, I feel it is my responsibility to contribute to the social movement. I believe that youth today, especially those who identify as an individual on the Q+ spectrum, have the most ability to incite change in society. The first step is to bring light to the movement and the social injustice as a whole. By bringing the issue into everyday conversation, there is the possibility of gathering enough support to make a change. According to Gandhi, nothing we do as individuals matters but its vitally important to do it anyway (Johnson 132). Often people feel as though they cannot make a difference because they do not see the change take place, but what Gandhi says is that we must continue to be the change. If I speak up about my sexuality, even in a small way, I know that although the effects may not be immediate, they will still happen later down the road. Similarly, there is a myth of no effect which

Daniel 5 blinds us to our own power in relation to other people. People do not always understand that they can make a difference, even though they feel powerless. For instance, this reluctance to acknowledge and use power comes up in the simplest everyday situations, as when a group of friends start laughing at a racist or a sexist joke and you have to decide whether to go along (Johnson 133). Personally, even before I came out of the closet, I told my friends not to make jokes about gays because they were offensive. After a while of being told off, they stopped. Had I not spoken up however, nothing would have changed and the jokes, whether purposefully homophobic, would have continued. If students as well as adults who hear disparaging remarks towards certain individuals made just speak up, society will be a lot better for it. We need to openly support people who step off the path of least resistance (148). If we outwardly support the right of women and men to love whomever they choose, we could possibly raise awareness of homophobia and heterosexism. Furthermore, if students were to ask school officials and teachers about whats happening to gay and lesbian students in local school, both parties would know whether these students are being harassed, suppressed, and oppressed by others at one of the most vulnerable stages of life. Lastly, when groups discuss sexual orientation, it raises questions about its relation to male privilege (Johnson 149). A second method is the reclamation of words used to oppress the queer community. Though this method is not widely supported, the tactic has some validity to it. For instance, the word faggot and queer were used to belittle gays and put them in their place. Now the community embraces the term queer and uses it to self-identify, especially when they do not fit within the standard sexuality binary. While the word faggot still has a negative connotation, Q+ youth have begun calling each other it in a friendly way, in an effort to take the sting out of the word. Some argue that things like this only hurt the movement, but in my opinion, taking back ownership of a word used to oppress is a powerful way of telling the majority that they cannot use it to hurt anyone anymore.

Daniel 6 Even more important than bringing up the social issue or reclaiming a few words is for Q+ youth to come out, and for those around them give their support. I have different opinions about coming out. While I believe that it is for society that we come out, it is critical to the overall movement. I hope that someday soon there will not be a need for the world to know whether you are gay, they will just know that you are in love and are happy, but until then, coming out humanizes the gay rights movement. Of the people who can be considered homophobic, most of them claim that they do not know any gay people. However, studies included in the New York Times have shown that there is the same percentage of queer-identifying individuals everywhere in the country; it is only more liberal places that seem to have a higher percentage. With this in mind, were all the closeted youth and adults to come out, no one would be able to say they do not support something because they do not know any one. One of the reasons that people are more accepting today than they were a decade back is because Three dimensional people are more persuasive than two-dimensional ones, meaning real people make a difference. The shift in viewpoint likely came about because, each year, a few thousand more gay people make the awkward announcement to their families and friends, supplanting images from the folklore of disgust (Ross 4). With things such as LGBT marriages and coming out, personal gestures ripple outwards into politics. In the generation of mass media, Facebook and YouTube, kids can come out and share their story with the world. Watching videos online of people talking about their experiences is what helped me. When I finally came out, I wrote a Facebook status to all of my friends and family. That status garnered hundreds of likes, which not only made me feel more accepted, but also showed me how many people now could say, they know a gay. With more students coming out, society is beginning to realize that there is not just a binary when it comes to sexual orientation and identity. According to a college freshmen at an open mike night, the growing list now includes lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, homosexual, asexual, pansexual omnisexual, trisexual, agender, bi-gender, third gender, transgender, transvestite,

Daniel 7 intersexual, two-spirit, hijra, polyamorous, undecided, questioning, other, and human (Schulman 4). With all of these different labels, there has been a demand to tack more letters onto LGBT. Stephen *a transgendered student at Sarah Lawrence College] and his peers are forging a political identity all their own, often at odds with mainstream gay culture, and because of instances like this, Youth today do not define themselves on the spectrum of L.G.B.T. (Schulman 1). Now, L.G.B.T., expanded from just gay and lesbian to include bisexual and transgender, is no longer enough. The new vanguard wants a broader, more inclusive abbreviation (Schulman 1). The emerging rubric is L.G.B.T.Q.I.A., which stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and then depending on whom you ask, queer or questioning, intersex, and asexual or ally. The problem with this is that, while it is great to have your own identity, the community is segmenting. It is important that while society recognizes an array of identities, the community does not fraction itself, detracting from the initial cause. Personally I think that Q+ should be the new term. Q, standing for queer and the + for anyone who does not think they fit within that category. That way, the movement stays united and the term represents everyone equally. If we are ever going to remedy the social issue of sexuality and inequality, then we need to start talking about it. Our voice needs to be heard in any way possible. Furthermore, the Q+ community must recognize the interconnectedness of other issues such as race or class. We must first recognize race, class, gender, [and sexuality] as interlocking categories that together cultivate profound differences in our personal biographies (Collins 3). Despite the fact that we all have both/and identitieswe persist in trying to classify each other in either/or categories (Collins 4). One minoritys struggle should be the shared struggle of all groups. This is the only way that progress can be made. The majority must be made the minority, through the combined efforts of the secondary groups. Members of subordinate groups must work toward replacing judgments by categories with new ways of thinking, in order to eliminate structural oppression of all kinds from society. In the words of Audre Lorde, each of us is called upon to take a stand (Collins 26).