One of the main rationalizations that is usually given for locking queer people out of mainstream American life and insisting on continuing to view them as fundamentally different or unusual is that queer sexuality is inappropriate for every day life. The idea is that, while movies, television shows, books, and other forms of media that show heavily implied heterosexual sex scenes can still be considered somewhat "appropriate" while media that portrays a queer couple or person--not sex between them, just a couple or a person--automatically makes that movie, television show, book, or other form of media "inappropriate," especially for children. This is because many heterosexual adults don't want their children to be influenced by the reality of being queer. They often feel this way because they have negative assumptions about the queer community ingrained into them: gays have no morals, they are inherently promiscuous, they have no family values--the list goes on and on. This is why many heterosexual adults, even if they may claim to be supportive of equal rights for gays, continue to be the perpetrators of oppression of the queer community.
And the most ironic part? These heterosexual adults are forcing queer people to conform to these stereotypes simply by continuing to assume that they exist and insisting on continuing to exclude queer people from society.
By locking queer people out of society because they are afraid of its influence and afraid of these stereotypes, the heterosexual community continues to treat queer people like outcasts. And if you're treated like an outcast, then you are inherently inclined to behave like an outcast. Many gay people behave promiscuously and make dangerous or reckless decisions simply because they have no other way of fitting into society. Time and again, examples have proven that the most common reaction to being negatively stereotyped as a group is to embrace that negative stereotype. I'm not saying this is a good thing, I'm just saying that, factually, that is what usually occurs and what is currently occurring in the queer community. Heterosexual adults say that queer people have no family values, and yet they continue to try to lock us out out of the institution of marriage. Nothing says "settling down and committing to hard work and family values" like marriage. If gay people were allowed to participate in this institution, it would encourage them to not exhibit the negative attributes that have come to be associated with them. If you treat us like we are supposed to be rule-following, moral, responsible people, then we will, in general, do so. Legalizing gay marriage will not by any means bring an end to all sexual promiscuity in the queer community, but heterosexual marriage has not brought an end to all sexual promiscuity in the heterosexual community, either.
Legalizing marriage may solve issues within the adult queer community, but it will not solve issues among adolescents who are too young to be married. Still, adolescent queer people face the same exclusion from the mainstream, heteronormative society, and they are likewise encouraged to behave like the social outcasts that they are. The best way to rectify this would be to include comprehensive health education in American high schools. Many queer people are educated on sex that does not affect them, and therefore, they feel excluded or see themselves as not part of what is "normal." Therefore, they are encouraged to behave recklessly like the social outcasts that they are treated as. Including comprehensive sexual education in high school health classes would have the same effect on the adolescent queer community that legalizing gay marriage would have on the adult queer community.
In conclusion, if you want us to behave like members of society, then started treating us like ones.
Charlie, your use of logos is extremely strong and extremely passionate! It really helps to bring out your point and the ending especially puts "the icing on the cake." Your tone is well balanced; it's reasonable without feeling like you're yelling at the reader or scolding them. In my opinion, I think the strongest use of logos was in the second to last paragraph. Nice job c:
ReplyDeleteReally liked this blog post Charlie! Your argument was carefully planned and executed in a very organized manner that allows the readers to absorb your logos and be more inclined to agree with your claim. You were able to address a point that although nuanced in nature and charged with your own fervor for the subject, came across as easy to understand and did not particularly sound like you were chastising your audience and more so you were informing them of a reality that may have been invisible to them.
ReplyDeleteI like that you're experimenting with a sassy tone and the second-person--a little Kincaidian. The analogy was comparing young adults who are queer with young adults who are heterosexual--always an effective strategy. Your use of logic and common sense is effective!
ReplyDeleteThe one word that occurred to me after reading this was "passionate". You had me really latched on from the beginning statement. You explained yourself very well and provided multiple example of why gay marriage should be legalized. Great work!
ReplyDelete