In this binary world of wrong or right, black or white, man or woman, top or bottom, naturally we are often confronted with something that just doesn't quite fit into this limited notion of how things (ought to) work.
As far as sexuality is concerned, this is perhaps the strictest of all the binary concepts: Man is the dominant provider and woman is the submissive receiver. This concise notion of masculinity and femininity is one that persists despite the progression of the evolution of knowledge in the past few generations that tries to convince us that there are more layers to this relationship between the genders, with each being equally capable of dominance and submission. On some level I believe most men naturally see themselves fitting within the ambit of provider and women as entitled to their care.
Following that reasoning, it should come as no surprise that partners in same-sex relationships see the world through this lens: A dichotomy of power, or an expression of different types of power, with both partners having certain specific expectations for themselves and of their other half by virtue of the role they adopt as part of their own identity.
That same-sex couples mirror general society should not be seen as a novelty. In fact, being products of society and being indoctrinated by the same moral code for survival in a hegemonic world, same-sex couples operate exactly as they are expected to, abiding by the same societal rules as everyone else.
Therefore, infidelity, adultery, spousal abuse and other such phenomena should not be seen as peculiarities of an iniquitous population especially when everyone else is doing it!
We are all bubbling in the soup of our culture and while individual ingredients have unique flavours, it's still soup!
So after all that fluff what am I getting at?
Very often same-sex couples are placed on a pedestal of peculiarity. Breeders think it's all an act with one (or both) of the persons involved putting on a great show to convince themselves, and their partner, that they are the personification of the sex role they prefer. A man is a man, and a woman is a woman even if the partners are two men and two women respectively.
All the positive and negative aspects of the definitions of masculinity and femininity are adopted by the partners and their lives play out as echoes of how it is expressed within the broader society in which they operate.
Men are entitled to be promiscuous, Women are obligated to be chaste; Men don't necessarily have to provide as much as be a figurehead (within the Jamaican context), while women are head cook and bottle washer; Men have inherited the patriarchal right to physically discipline their subordinate female partner(s) while Women are expected not to provoke him to wrath.
These are not that unusual within the heterosexual context but for some reason it is amplified as evidence of intrinsic disorder when one is dealing with the homos.
Why is this?
I believe it is an expression of a latent hatred that is so often repressed in this faux politically correct world. People harbour these feelings and just need the right opportunity to say "I told you so!"
Should sexual minorities be pressured not to fulfill this prophecy and not to dwell in the stereotypes ascribed by those that would wish for our demise?
Is it fair to ask that persons live their lives constantly concerned that they must be shining examples of perfection for an infinitely diverse population?
How can we ask that gay people stop cursing, fighting, abusing, and killing each other when the society that they emerge from is already murderous and abusive?
People are people no matter where they fall in the rainbow spectrum.
What we need to teach is universal love, both for self and for one's fellow man, and to abolish impractical notions of identity.
We need to understand that we are one and no different in the eyes of the creator.
Maybe then will we truly understand Bob Marley's "One Love" concept.
Subscribe in a reader
No comments:
Post a Comment