homophobia

Rules of Desire: Evolutionary Psychologists Getting More Nuanced But No More Effective At Explaining "Hot Girl On Girl Action"

Photo by Flickr user The mofoJT. Cached as a bandwidth-conserving courtesy
Photo by Flickr user The mofoJT. Used under a Creative Commons license.

Now if you only the abstract below you might conclude the only possible explanation for women "evolving" same-sex desire was (what a surprise, *cough*Rule of Desire #1*cough*) for "the kids!"  Since women having sex for any reason other than getting pregnant or getting help raising their kids would be intolerable! Inconceivable!

Born Both Ways: The Alloparenting Hypothesis for Sexual Fluidity in Women

Barry X. Kuhle, Department of Psychology, University of Scranton; Sarah Radtke, Department of Psychology, Ryerson University

Abstract

Given the primacy of reproduction, same-sex sexual behavior poses an evolutionary puzzle. Why would selection fashion motivational mechanisms to engage in sexual behaviors with members of the same sex? We propose the alloparenting hypothesis, which posits that sexual fluidity in women is a contingent adaptation that increased ancestral women’s ability to form pair bonds with female alloparents who helped them rear children to reproductive age. Ancestral women recurrently faced the adaptive problems of securing resources and care for their offspring, but were frequently confronted with either a dearth of paternal resources due to their mates’ death, an absence of paternal investment due to rape, or a divestment of paternal resources due to their mates’ extra-pair mating efforts. A fluid sexuality would have helped ancestral women secure resources and care for their offspring by promoting the acquisition of allomothering investment from unrelated women. Under this view, most heterosexual women are born with the capacity to form romantic bonds with both sexes. Sexual fluidity is a conditional reproductive strategy with pursuit of men as the default strategy and same-sex sexual responsiveness triggered when inadequate paternal investment occurs or when women with alloparenting capabilities are encountered. Discussion focuses on (a) evidence for alloparenting and sexual fluidity in humans and other primates; (b) alternative explanations for sexual fluidity in women; and(c) fourteen circumstances predicted to promote same-sex sexual behavior in women.

Sign!

And reading just the abstract you might conclude that they conclude there could be no other possible mechanism whereby women would form sexual attachments with other women there's therefore absolute certainty that heterosexual women have "sexual fluidity." It's all about the conditional reproductive strategies, see.

But if you read the actual paper (PDF here) you'd realize that, no, they qualify their assertions to such a bizarre degree that... you kind of wonder why they bothered in the first place.

The sentence to watch while reading the thing seems to be this "Under this view, most heterosexual women are born with the capacity to form romantic bonds with both sexes." Really, rather than trying to justify their assertion that nominally hetero women form same-sex sexual relationships to facilitate childrearing (a.k.a. alloparenting) they mostly seem to be speculating about why, let alone how, women "evolved" to have hawt girl-on-girl action.

Did I say "sigh" already? I guess I already did.

Did you know that, based on research lesbians report enjoying sex with men less? Did you know, further, that women who've been abused and/or been victims of sexual violence seem to have more difficulty forming same-sex relationships with men? Did you know that heterosexual women in isolation from opposite-sex partners are more likely to form same-sex relationships when confined (as in a harem or... I dunno... jail) with only other women? Yes, yes, and yes! Because, for the kids, see? It's gotta be! Because...

More interestingly, did you know that out of the 14 "testable hypotheses" they propose only the first four seem to have been studied? Or that out of some of those you really, really have to scratch deep to find something that sort of resembles confirmation? Son of a gun! What a whacky way to practice science!

Oh well, at least baseless, experiment-free "research" papers beats getting college coeds to give you unprotected blowjobs to "confirm" whether your semen is an antidepressant.

What's so $%!#% frustrating for me is that I actually believe humans evolve certain psychological tendencies and behaviors! I even believe it's likely that some of our behaviors are sexually selected for! But empty owl whiz like this stuff just makes anything else anyone tries do do less credible. And therefore discourages people who might someday turn out to be competent scientists from giving it a whirl.

Note: in the end notes the article was apparently rejected and then resubmitted. It may first have been rejected by Penthouse Letters. :-P


Tags:

Acknowledgement for Mary Matalan's Point About Gay Marriage Success and Straight Marriage Failures

Should we congratulate conservatives when they correctly say the obvious? I'd say yes. Case in point: Mary Matalin says, correctly, that failed heterosexual marriages are a far greater threat to the institution of marriage than successful gay ones. David Edwards has the scoop:

Republican strategist Mary Matalin, who has previously said that marriage equality is not a civil right, asserted that polls now show Americans support same sex marriage because they know it’s not a “threat to the civil order.”

“Well, because Americans have common sense,” she explained. “There are important constitutional, biological, theological, ontological questions relative to homosexual marriage. People who live in the real world say, the greater threat to the civil order are the heterosexuals who don’t get married and are making babies. That’s an epidemic in crisis proportions. That is irrefutably more problematic for our culture than homosexuals getting married.”

Source: Raw Story

Good for Matalan!

Now one could argue, as I often do, that the tradition of marriage has some violent and alienating elements that make even successful marriage problematic (i.e. Which Husband Would You Stone For Adultery?) And one could argue, as I've also done in the past but Kevin Drum and others have done more recently, that single-parent families aren't as problematic for society as Matalan suggests. And one could argue, as numerous others have argued, that rather than celebrate secular recognition of gay marriage we should stop secularly recognizing marriage at all. But! If you're going to stand up for the institution, as Matalan and others gay and straight choose to, then there's exactly zero question that Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, or Britney Spears' hetero marriages undermine the institution far, far, far more than the gay and lesbian couples who began getting married here in Washington State at 12:01 AM this morning. The heterosexual shotgun marriages of children in Nebraska and elsewhere undermine it far more than the same-sex marriages that will soon take place in Maine. The shaky, fragile, and outright false heterosexual marriages of David Vitters, Elliot Spitzer, Ted Haggard, or Phyllis Gates can't make less of a mockery of the institution any gay marriages that's likely take place in California, Minnesota, Hawaii, Massachusetts and on and on around the country.

Note: this doesn't mean some percentage of same-sex couples won't eventually turn out to have marriages every bit as bogus as current hetero ones can get. In fact, since gay people are exactly like straight people that's both a) inevitable but also b) the whole point! We're not enabling gay marriage because gay people are more noble nor because straight people are more depraved -- we're doing it because if any couple should be able to do it then every should be!

So yeah. Even though it's obvious, good for Matalan!


Tags:

Real Pride: Markos Moulitsas on the Death of "Gay" as a Slur, Me on the Death of the Blight of Homophobia-phobia

Photo by Flickr user Wyoming_Jackrabb. Cached as a bandwidth-conserving courtesy
Photo of military participants in a the 2012 Knox Pridefest parade by Flickr user Wyoming_Jackrabbit.
Used under a Creative Commons license.

At least here in the West, homophobia-phobia has long been of the most oppressive, coercive, corrosive, behavior-distorting blights on human male behavior. Homophobia-phobia being the (sometimes well-founded) fear of being mistakenly identified as a gay man when you're straight. My favorite example is men being paralyzed when asked to carry their wife or girlfriend's purse.

Because, you know, touching a purse might make you gay. Or, worse, look gay.

Because, you know, all gay men carry purses.

Or something.

Anyway, I say homophobia-phobia is a well-founded fear for straight men because... of the verbal and too-often physical bashing actual gay men have too-often had to face.

Too often at the hands of...

Straight men who themselves were...

Terrified of themselves being identified as...

Gay.

As George Carlin (in)famously put it while discussing macho in the tough ethnic-Irish neighborhood he grew up in, "A fag was a guy who wouldn't go downtown with you beatin' up queers."

Bingo! Nobody wanted to be the "fag" who wouldn't beat up "queers" because, well, then the guys wouldn't have to go downtown to find someone to beat up. If you weren't willing to go they could save a bunch of time by just beating you up instead.

So?

So, kudos to DailyKOS founder Markos Moulitsas for nailing this little sea change:

Marines and Navy personnel march in last year's Gay Pride Parade in San Diego. If wingnuts want to confuse me with these guys, why would I get upset?

One of these days, dumbass conservatives will figure out that calling me gay is not an insult. It's a compliment.

And no, they'll never really figure that out.

Source: Daily Kos

I think that's about as good as it gets.

Aside: This is a bit off topic but I didn't use Markos's original photo. Instead I used one from a recent Pride parade in my hometown of Knoxville, TN. Because another consequence of the decline of both homophobia and homophobia-phobia? The main street of town, the named in the 1890s, the one that's been blighted since the early 1970s by its name to a point where nearly all the business on the streets moved out and the ones that couldn't move started using the street addresses of the alleys behind them in a veritable orgy of homophobia-phobia? That street? Gay Street? It's having a renaissance like you wouldn't believe. The beautiful old stores, banks, and office buildings are being restored. The preserved-through-neglect nearby old city is awash in night clubs, coffee shops, and startups. And the nearby Market Square is alive at night -- verged with restaurants, ice-cream shops, boutiques, and fountains and filled with students, families with their children, the young hip and alive as well as the old and crusty -- in a way I've only seen in plazas in Greece. There aren't a lot of places more genteely homophobic or homophobia-phobic than east Tennessee so I'm thinking if it can start there -- even in a tiny area, even in a tiny way, then it can happen anywhere.

Finally!


Tags:

Homophobia-phobia Has Consequences Too

From Someecards.com. Cached as a bandwidth-conserving courtesy
Image from Someecards.com.

 

I've joked in the past about the unreflective fear that touching his wife's purse might make him gay. Or even just the fear of lookinggay (which, in too many sub-cultures, amounts to the same thing.) That's just funny in a sad sort of way. This comic reminded me that there are other scenarios where the consequences of homophobia and homophobia-phobia can be more dire.

Note: I'm giving this post a "no-sex" class tag because I think part of the flip-out about homophobia-phobia is tied to the dominant paradigm's conviction that (heterosexual) men are all and always reflexively and obligately sexual who are therefore incapable of resisting any potentially sexual activity. And thus must studiously police themselves in order to resist "turning gay."


Tags:

No, Really, Us Heteros Don't Need Any Help, We've Been Dragging it Down All By Ourselves For Years

In a news roundup Jos quipped

The gay and lesbian community of Minnesota apologizes to recently resigned Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch for ruining the institution of marriage and causing her to commit adultery.

Source: Feministing

Ouch!

Meanwhile life goes on:

Photo via LA Times. Cached as a bandwidth-conserving courtesy
Photo via LA Times


Tags:

Jeana at My Sex Professor: "Being Ironically Sexist is Still Sexist"

Photo by Flickr user sparrow611. Cached as a bandwidth-conserving courtesy
Photo by Flickr user sparrow611. Used under a Creative Commons license.

Jeana of My Sex Professor says

A lot of advertising is, no surprise, rather sexist and regressive when it comes to gender roles. But if the advertising demonstrates an awareness of sexist tropes, is it still sexist?

Source: My Sex Professor

Her answer, and mine, is yes. As she puts it in her title "Being Ironically Sexist Is Still Sexist"

And while we're at it, using "that's so gay" when you mean "that's so uncool" is homophobic, even if all the other kids are saying it. Even when you "know" you're cool with gay people and you're just being ironic about it.

Calling someone a "dick," a "bitch," or a "cunt" when you mean uncouth, aggressive, or ruthless is also sexist. Even when you mean it ironically.

It's not a matter of knowing what it means so it's ok to use it. It's that intentionally or not, imitating such tropes and stereotypes nevertheless flatters them.


Tags:

Amanda Marcotte On the Peculiar Positivity of 'Winger Comparisons of Homosexuality to Alcoholism

Amanda Marcotte on the (no, seriously) bright side of right-winger comparisons of homosexuality to alcoholism.

Here's what I find fascinating about all this: the "homosexuality is like alcoholism" thing actually came about because social conservatives are trying to sound more tolerant of gays.  It's actually an attempt to evade accusations of bigotry.  The old line was basically that gays are molesters and perverts who only do gay stuff because they're bad people.  The narrative is that gays are broken people with a disease, a compulsion---and that they need "help" to overcome it.  But the public saw through that attempt at revisionism as quickly as it was concocted.  

Source: Pandagon

She reminds us that this latest slur is just, well, the latest in a slow but steady retreat from raw demonization. For many conservatives it's more a matter of, well, resistance to change -- they're still at least nominally opposed but their hearts just aren't in it anymore. See also their similarly reluctant but nevertheless evolving attitudes towards women in the workplace.

Again, it's not that they wouldn't slam on the brakes if they could -- that was pretty much the iconic William F. Buckley's definition of conservatism. It's just that as more and more gay people come out... and, as Dan Savage has pointed out, turn out to be just about as boring as anyone else, there's just not all that much to get the shrieking kajeebees about.


Tags:

Still Very Bad News About Violent Intolerance Near My Neighborhood Even if it Turns Out Not to be Trans-Bashing

Note: Trigger warnings are in order for this post about a potential hate crime with an uncomfortable twist.

Photo by Flickr user Great Beyond. Cached as a bandwidth-conserving courtesy
Photo of graffiti at Ballard Skate Park by Flickr user Great Beyond. Used under a Creative Commons license.

Bad news from one of my local neighborhood's news blogs, My Ballard:

Just about two weeks ago, Tad and Cindy Anderson’s daughter, Tiva, was attacked with a baseball bat near the skate park at Ballard Commons Park. She suffered a serious head injury, but Tiva is expected to make a full physical recovery. However, her parents say she’s emotionally fragile since the attack.

...

“She has learning disabilities that can make it hard to interact with her, and she is transgender (biologically male but considers herself female and sometimes dresses that way),” the parents write in an email to neighbors. “It probably should have been obvious to us a long time ago, but this turns out to be a dangerous combination. Transgender people are the most likely to be harassed and Tiva is particularly vulnerable due to her limited social skills.”

...

The only thing the parents know is that the attacker is a white female, and they believe she may hang out around the skate park. “The female came up along side [of her] and told her, ‘I don’t want to see you around the skate bowl anymore,’” the police report states. “The female then struck [her] on the right side of the head with the baseball bat.”

Source: My Ballard Blog

The police aren't certain the attack was specifically because the victim is transgender, and in our neighborhood it's entirely possible it wasn't. In which case it would be, what? "Regular" bullying not of a trans kid but of a developmentally disabled girl? With a baseball bat? Either way not so great.


Tags:

Marina Adshade on Threatened Conservative Boycott of Toronto's Non-Homophobic, Publically-Funded Religious Schools

Very cool economics-based step-by-step takedown of a threat by a Toronto priest who's threatened to pull 5,000 children from the city's government-funded Catholic School system because they're not being homophobic enough for his tastes. Economics professor Marina Adshade says

Here is a quotable quote from an angry Coptic Orthodox priest in Toronto who this week has threatened to mobilize the removal of 5,000 children from the publicly-funded Catholic School Board: “We don’t want teachers talking about God creating Adam and Steve. It’s Adam and Eve.”

All this because the Toronto Catholic School Board is promising to mandate “a learning and working environment in which all individuals are treated with respect and dignity regardless of race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, record of offenses, marital status, family status or disability.”

...

Why this is an interesting story to me is that an economic threat against a publicly-funded institution doesn’t make any sense. The school board should be asking: Are you going to stop using a service that you don’t pay for? And this concerns us how exactly?

...

Even if parents could afford to withdraw their children and pay for private education, will that education come with a guarantee that their new private school will tolerate homophobia? Because, let’s face it that is what these parents are asking for.

...

Finally, I have to wonder how many of the parents of these children are right now looking at little Steve and thinking: Oh honey, you are just not going to survive high school without protection that includes sex-orientation. There have to be a few of them, right?

Source: Big Think Proxy

It's a lovely piece and you really might enjoy reading the whole thing instead of my excerpts. But what I especially appreciate about it is her use of economic and personal/political choice instead of my own knee-jerk reaction. Which would be some kind of infuriated snark about how God didn't create Father Adam and schoolboy Steve either.

Call it the difference between intelligence and wit with Ashade nicely demonstrating the effectiveness of the former over the latter.


Tags:

User login