biandlesbianliterature:entirelytookeen:aintnosintobefinallyclean:october-rosehip:love-geofff
biandlesbianliterature: entirelytookeen: aintnosintobefinallyclean: october-rosehip: love-geofffree: cutehaywood: the straights are at it again Reblog if you are a greedy gay hoarding refracted light all for your greedy gay self I totally am, but also: I have a story. The time: 1995. The place: a small liberal arts college. We decided to participate in “denim day” which was a widespread event wherein on National Coming Out Day, you would wear denim to indicate SUPPORT FOR the LGBT community. Our support group made posters that were very, very clear about this. Wearing denim did not mean that you were coming out, it meant you supported anyone around you who might. I have never seen so many suits and khakis IN MY LIFE. People who accidentally wore jeans went home and changed. The community took it as a rebuke. We drew in closer to eachother, and felt unwelcome everywhere we thought we had friends before. And I had people later tell me “You know I support you, just… I didn’t want anyone to think I was.” First off, I DON’T know you support me. Not if you refuse to, for one day, change nothing about your life to show it. Second off… why is that such a terrifying thought to you? I remember before rainbows were a “gay thing”. They were everywhere. Church walls next to arks. School walls next to sunshine faces. People have VOLUNTARILY abandoned every other use. I have HEARD PEOPLE SAY they just couldn’t use rainbows anymore because people would think of “gay stuff.” So I know this is a joke, and a stolen one at that, but you’ve done this to yourselves. If someone is so terrified of being perceived as queer that they will INSTANTLY abandon something they like if it has queer germs on it now or something, then they don’t deserve refracted light. Maybe help us change the world into a place where being mistaken for queer would be just a thing to chuckle about and you can have refracted light back. The LGBTQ+ community didn’t steal the rainbow. The straights abandoned it. People are reblogging with “this is just a stolen Demetri Martin joke” as if that somehow invalidates the point so let me add a supporting incident/addendum: There’s a largely apocryphal association of violets as a symbol of love between women as “dating back to Sappho.” This is not really true – Sappho did write poems about violets, but apparently the association really gained traction in America with a 1926 Broadway play called The Captive (adapted from the French, by Edouard Bourdet). The story is about a woman trying to deny her same-sex desire and love, marrying a man in the attempt. Spoilers for a nearly century-old play: it ends happily for the lesbians, it’s pretty cool. Unfortunately because of this, the play was shut down after 17 weeks on charges of obscenity. Anyway. The heroine’s lover is never actually seen on stage – but in her final, victorious attempt to lead the heroine back to her side, she sends a nosegay of violets. After the premiere, shutdown, and subsequent court hearings, violet sales plummeted. In an act of what can only be described as “intense hetero panic,” people stopped buying violets. Because of a play. A play where there isn’t even any “enacted” same-sex physicality onstage. But The Captive ends with the women happy, and together. And they exchange violets. And that was all it took! Again, there are stories that lesbians and queer women took inspiration and used violets as signals after the play popularized the association – and I don’t doubt it, although I’m pretty sure we can trust that was mainly women who could afford to do so, financially and socially. But again, that’s largely apocryphal. What is on record is the violet farmers and florists going, “yeah, this play has really fucked us.” Obviously queerness is not infectious, but there’s a bone-deep fear of ever being subject to the same treatment queer people receive, even for a second. And the fear of association with such innocuous, even generic symbols like flowers – like rainbows – means those same people somewhat invest in the idea that treatment is deserved. Because gay symbols are not created by a sexual minority exerting their oh-so-massive cultural influence, but by the dominant majority being more terrified of association than outraged by condemnation. Again, as the follow-up tried to explain: it’s not about the symbol. It’s the defensive disassociation, the “I’M NOT GAY THOUGH,” which is exhausting. And telling. [image description: a comment reading “I like rainbows but I’m not gay. So I wear a rainbow on my shirt but then under it I got to put, “Not gay.” But I’m not against gay people so under that I got to put, “But supportive.” I just think it’s weird that on egroup took refracted light. It’s pretty greedy gays!“] -- source link