Popular media provides many examples of the power play between herteronormative ideals and homosexual culture. In society there is a struggle of power between the people who have it, and the ones that don’t. In this battle for social power, the media acts as an arena for the public to view the fight. However, some participants fight dirty, even if you don’t see it. While the media doesn’t always advertise hate, it does often use subliminal messages to reinforce the heteronormative ideals of what is acceptable. This means that the heterosexism in media perpetuates homophobia. This can be done in many ways, including the over-feminization of homosexual characters, the use of gay characters as plot devices or catalysts, and over-exaggerations of heterosexuality in order to deny possibilities of homosexuality. This is a social issue and it is worthy of discussion because of the media’s proven influence on culture. These types of messages encourage homophobia and do not address actual issues, and this leads to reinforcement that while homosexuality is struggling to gain presence, validity, and recognition as a normative lifestyle, heterosexuality is innately superior.
When a homosexual character appears in popular media, they are very frequently over-feminized. This includes gay males and lesbians. Gay males are often feminized in the way they talk, the activities they participate in, the way the dress, and their general mannerisms.
This keeps the main focus on heterosexuality and eases anxiety about gay people being a threat to heteronormative values. It promotes a tolerance and acknowledgement of the gay culture, but does not delve into it in a way that equalizes it or validates it. This also inhibits the strength of homosexuality in the power struggle.
Heterosexism is a systematic way of enforcing heterosexuality as the cultural norm. It’s accomplished in media by clearly showing heterosexuality and justifying any homosexual subtext as part of that heterosexuality.
When a homosexual character appears in popular media, they are very frequently over-feminized. This includes gay males and lesbians. Gay males are often feminized in the way they talk, the activities they participate in, the way the dress, and their general mannerisms.
This over-feminization puts the gay male into a category with females. This de-masculinizes them and lowers their threat level.
This occurrence is used as a tool to maintain the traditional male power. By feminizing gay men and grouping them with women, they are no longer a threat to straight males. In the article “Reinventing Privilege: The New (Gay) Man in Contemporary Popular Media”, Shugart points out about gay males:
...that their entrée into heteronormative culture is ultimately guaranteed by strategies apparent in a second, subtler subtext, one that features increased sexual access to, license with, and paternalistic control of women, all of which accordingly reframe gay male sexuality as an extension of heterosexual male privilege predicted on control of female sexuality (Shugart, 80).
Lesbians are also frequently over-feminized for the same reasons. A masculine lesbian is perceived as threatening, and an ultra-feminine lesbian remains inferior to straight men and is also perceived as “hot” and adds flare to the straight male gaze.
This works as a tool to objectify them and push them further down the social hierarchy. Straight males are often hyper-masculinized in order to reinforce their heterosexuality, especially when they are placed in situations that may lead to the questioning of their sexuality.
Another phenomenon that takes place in popular media is when a gay character is introduced to a plotline purely for entertainment or as a catalyst for a dramatic plot. The sexuality of the character is often made fun of or lightly discussed, but no real in-depth examination is done into the character’s life or issues surrounding their sexuality. This occurrence uses the individual homosexual as a tool to feed the plot and denies any individual identity from the character and aids in the holding of homosexuality at an inferior level to heterosexuality.
This also presents a message to media participants that homosexuality is funny or dramatic. Therefore, people think that it is ok to make fun of gay people in real life and that gay people are the frequent cause of problems in the world.Also in the article, “Reinventing Privilege…” the concept is pointed out:
Gayness is seen through the eyes of the confused heterosexuals, struggling with their own reactions and feelings. While I applaud the attempts to reckon with heterosexual fears and homophobia, I am afraid that this focus can further marginalize gay people, set them aside as vehicles for straight enlightenment, much in the way that people of color serve as avenues for white understanding of race (Shugart, 70).
This keeps the main focus on heterosexuality and eases anxiety about gay people being a threat to heteronormative values. It promotes a tolerance and acknowledgement of the gay culture, but does not delve into it in a way that equalizes it or validates it. This also inhibits the strength of homosexuality in the power struggle.
Heterosexism is a systematic way of enforcing heterosexuality as the cultural norm. It’s accomplished in media by clearly showing heterosexuality and justifying any homosexual subtext as part of that heterosexuality.
If there is an advertisement that has two men, they either have to being playing sports to justify their physical contact, with a woman to reinforce which sex they are attracted to, and if part of the ad is unclear, they are hypermasculinized to compensate for any uncertainty.
Homosexuality doesn’t threaten heterosexuality unless it’s perceived as threatening. Perception is subjective; just because something exists, doesn’t mean that it exists to rival something else. Without homosexuality, heterosexuality doesn’t exist. Homosexuality validates heterosexuality by contrasting against it. The media influences culture by showing examples of what the world is supposed to be like, and since most media is heterosexist, it continues to create homophobia in the public’s eye. This favoritism gives heterosexuality an advantage in the social power struggle.
Homosexuality doesn’t threaten heterosexuality unless it’s perceived as threatening. Perception is subjective; just because something exists, doesn’t mean that it exists to rival something else. Without homosexuality, heterosexuality doesn’t exist. Homosexuality validates heterosexuality by contrasting against it. The media influences culture by showing examples of what the world is supposed to be like, and since most media is heterosexist, it continues to create homophobia in the public’s eye. This favoritism gives heterosexuality an advantage in the social power struggle.
We have also arranged our images within "The Box" that represents the power struggle between the different mediated examples. The examples that use homosexuality but are excused because of sports and other scapegoats are at the top because they are still heterosexual, where as the further down you go, you see more examples of pure homosexuality which have less power.
No comments:
Post a Comment