Blindsiding our Freedom

I'm going out on a limb here and if you disagree with me that's fine: we're different people and, as a result, we're bound to have differences. Our society, generally speaking, is not pro-gay. I mean, if you go around asking people if they're okay with homosexuals, for the most part, they're going respond by saying that they have no problem with homosexuals. But, are they telling the truth or just telling you what they think you want to hear? We've gone through a lot of equality movements: end of slavery in America, women's equality, etc. Now we're approaching the movement for equality for gays. 

If someone asked me what I thought about gays, I'd probably respond with another question: something along the lines of, "why?" or "who's asking?" After that, I'd reply that I have no issue with gays. By that, I mean that I don't care about them, no more than I care about non-gays. Why should I worry about the sexual orientation/preference of another? I'm me and they're them. Furthermore, I'm in no position to judge them. How can I judge them? On what basis? We live in a country that promotes equality and freedom for ALL. Not freedom for Whites, Blacks, Asians, or Middle Easterners. Not freedom for Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists. Freedom for all. It's something that we seem to lose sight of. Actually, I'd argue that it's not so much that we lose sight of it, but rather that the media draws our attention away from it. 

In most media outlets, gays are suppressed. Think back to the things you've seen in life. How many gay ads have you seen? How many books about gays have made the bestseller list? For me, and for many people, the answer is close to none. I looked to see how many books that talk about the issues such as 'what homosexuals deal with on a regular basis just because they're gay' were popular or had made bestseller lists. I was surprised to find barely any. Truth be told, the only popular gay/lesbian books that I found were those of an erotic natures. 

In our society, similar to that seen in 1984 (just not to such an extent), our sexual urges are suppressed. Michael Warner talks about that concept (among others) in "The Trouble with Normal:  Sex, Politics, and The Ethics of Queer Life". In the text, Warner, talks about how in society our sexual urges are suppressed. 

Why is sex something that's shunned by society? Why is talking about our sexual urges something that's not approved by society? Well, to be honest, talking about sex isn't shunned per say, it's more of a taboo.  Why don't we like talking about sex? Why are people shamed about their sexual desires? Our sexual urges are biological in nature, something both homosexuals and heterosexuals share. The desire to connect on a deeper level with another and have sex. Honestly it's stupid to avoid talking about sex and treating it like it's taboo. If we can talk about doing things like eating and breathing, then we sure as hell can talk about sex. I mean, honestly, it's not that big of a deal. I love sex as much as the next person and I don't see why it's something that's not spoken of. In Warner's text, he talks about how the taboo, the shame in regards to sex, arose from decades and decades of sexual repression. Throughout history, men have usually been allowed to satisfy their sexual hunger and, for the most part, were not ostracized for their actions. However, women weren't allowed to go out and satiate these urges, which is an example of the double standards that exists in society. It wasn't until recently that women were allowed to really explore their sexuality. Men were allowed to do whatever the fuck they wanted and women we're expected to be meek objects, robots if you will, that did as society dictated. Although, men went out to quench their sexual thirst they didn't talk about it in front of women in an effort to preserve their innocence, an image that is associated with women as a result of media and society. As a result, sex wasn't something that was discussed often. Nowadays, people aren't as hesitant to talk about it, but it varies from person to person. I mean, most people still don't talk to their children about their sexuality and all that. Most of us have gone through 'the talk'. It was given so much hype but it really wasn't a big deal.

That's just how it is with homosexuality. What's the main difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals? C'mon, you guys know this. Heterosexuals are attracted to members or the opposite sex (hetero-different) and homosexuals are attracted to members of the same sex (homo-same). So what's that attraction mean? What it means is that gay men like having sex with each other and lesbians like having sex with each other. Great. Whoop-de-diddly-do. What's the big deal? Personally, girl on girl seems kind of hot to me, but that's probably because I'm a heterosexual male. 

There are often ads in which there are multiple women with one man, which tells the audience that it's okay for a man to have sex with more than one woman. That the person, the guy in the ad, is so attractive, that he has 2 or more women. These pieces of media, these ads, are not objected. Images such as these are shown from time to time and so they are not object. It's almost normal nowadays to see ads like these. The image under this on the right hand side could have been released under the pretense of an ad for cologne and the one on the left could be that for a dating site. In society, sexual desires are suppressed. However, with time, the extent to which it's suppressed has decreased. Now, that doesn't mean that sexual suppression is gone because it isn't. The blunt of the sexual oppression now however seems to be placed on homosexuals.

                               

There are often images like this on television and on various ads. However, those images are not ostracized. Why aren't they?

 Now take the following image as a counter example to the ones above: 

If we had the 4 images above and had them shown to a random group of people, such as the general public, what do you think their responses would be? The might say that the 1st one is a little too explicit (not much would really be said against it since most guys wouldn't mind seeing that). The 2nd and 3rd one would likewise not be objected. The final one however, would most definitely meet a critical audience that would be bothered by it. The 4th image features 4 guys; from the looks of it, it looks like 4, sexy, hot-blooded, gay guys. Now, that image would be oppressed for a variety of reasons. The main reason would be because it depicts 4 gay men. 

Although sexual urges and desires are oppressed for heterosexuals, homosexual urges and tendencies seem to be oppressed more than with heterosexuals.  This shows that there is double standards in the media and society in relationship to homosexuals just as there are for women. Our so-called "freedom" of speech, press, and liberty, are not really free since it only seems to be for those approved by society. The media is influenced by society and in our society, homosexual urges, desires, and tendencies are frowned upon. As a result, there are double standards in the media in relationship to homosexuals and the media is often twisted to reflect the view of society.