At my high
school, I noticed that it was really common for black girls to date other black
girls. Usually, one of the girls in the relationship would behave extremely
masculinely- by sagging her pants, walking with swag, acting tough, and holding
her body like a man- and the other would behave very femininely. Sometimes,
particularly from afar, it was difficult to determine whether the relationship
was heterosexual or homosexual. I talked to one of my female friends who was
black and dating another girl and asked her why she thought there were so many
more black lesbians than white lesbians. She explained to me that it was really
hard to find nice, respectful black men at our school; most were misogynistic
thugs who took pleasure in humiliating girls. It seemed that a portion of the
black girls had elected not to deal with them anymore, and turned to female
replacements. I found some girls’ emulation of masculine behavior to be
especially interesting. It seems to correspond with some of what Froyum says.
Froyum claims that low-income, marginalized black boys find few means through
which to assert power, dominance, and control. It seems to me that low-income,
marginalized black girls have even fewer means through which they can feel as
though they are in control. I perceived that some girls adopted this persona in
order to signal to boys that they were not going to be messed with, dominated,
or controlled. Perhaps in the five years since this article was written sexual
fluidity and experimentation and gender nonconformity among girls have become
more acceptable…? I think an interesting study could be done on how the
adoption of masculinity among girls grants them similar status and privileges as
those experienced by boys.
I thought
the author’s link between sexuality and gender conformity was intriguing and I
wish he (she?) had spend a little more time on this concept. I read an article
not too long ago that reported that in the very early twentieth century, two
men could have sex together or experience same-sex desires and not be
considered homosexuals. A man would be labeled homosexual only if he also
exhibited feminine tendencies. So if two men had sex, the one in the dominant,
masculine position (on top) would not be labeled as homosexual, whereas the one
in the submissive position probably would be considered homosexual. This
article and Froyum’s article really speak to how much of homophobia is fueled
by equating homosexuality with not doing one’s gender properly.
Furthermore,
I think it’s fascinating how easily the more “legitimate”, “natural”, and “mainstream”
lifestyle could be switched. I spoke recently with a student who transferred
from Smith (an all-girls college known for having a lot of lesbians) who told
me that, while there, a number of lesbians harassed and ostracized her for
being straight (side note- I have no idea how truthful this story is…I’ve
interacted with this person a grand total of two times). It’s just crazy how
the majority gets to decide what is moral and socially acceptable and what is
not.
Ellie, I enjoyed reading about your personal experience with your friend who was/is dating another girl. I think it is crazy to see how these girls date other girls because they cannot find men of their race/color who are respectful enough to date. This brings up a couple of topics however? If these girls who are dating girls are saying they date girls because they cannot find a worthy enough male, are they actually lesbians? If a man who presented himself cleanly, acted respectfully toward women, and was headed down the right path approached one of these females, would that change the girls mind? And also, white about the white males? Is that out of question? You do a great job in making the audience aware of the struggles in which these youths face daily.
ReplyDeleteEllie brought up the interesting point that Black boys in her school marginalized and mistreated girls, causing a rather socially interesting phenomenon. As Ellie points out and is brought up in the article: “Their (boys) ability to dominate others in order to establish themselves as men, consequently, cannot lie in their position as professionals or high-powered bosses.” Therefore: “boys were sexually aggressive toward female peers and teachers in order to conjure up the fantasmatic as well as physical specter of domination over a female of any age.” I am glad Ellie brought this part of the article up because it was the part I found the most disturbing and also normative. I mean society has kind of accepted boys behavior in regards to girls, as the article says boys feel empowered when they abandon women: “impregnating women without becoming tied down brought young men esteem and respect among male peers.” The scary thing is that this does not outrage society; rather we just pity the mothers and babies left behind. While the treatment of homosexuality in this article outrages us, I have not seen another post that brings the issue of heterosexual’s treatment of each other into focus in the same way.
ReplyDeleteJosephine Bingler - Comment
ReplyDeleteVery interesting response, Ellie! I can completely relate with the points in your response. My high school was over 50% black and I noticed the same trend. A lot of black girls dated other black girls and almost always, one girl in the relationship displayed "manly" characteristics. I never asked any of them why this was the case but it was interesting to read your friend's response where she said it was because the men were so controlling, disrespectful, and displayed the "thug" persona. In "At Least I'm Not Gay", Froyum writes how the body is the most readily available resource to low-status boys. This sheds light as to why boys feel the need to join gangs and fights which help them release aggression and establish their masculinity, proving their control and heterosexuality.
I find Ellie’s response intriguing. Similar to Ellie at my high school I noticed relationships between females of color but not to the extent that she describes. However I never thought of them as lesbians but like Ellie mentioned that their relationships were a consequences of the “available” boys in our school and their inability to maintain a respectful relationship. This speaks to what Froyum was stating that minority males have to find away to assert their dominance in control and one way is attacking sexuality and the other is controlling and maintaining a dominate relationship with females. I question why it is that in order to prove their masculinity the males at UYN feel the need to bash and dominate people around them. I feel that this phenomena can be traced back to Kimmel and the expectations attached to Guyland.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to read about how these lesbian girls tried to do gender in their own way by having a masculine and feminine member of the relationship. Again, as many have stated before me, it is due to the fact that many of the minority males are found to be unsatisfactory to them, but one has to question if this truly means that they are interested in females, or whether they are just acting in this way in order to have some type of meaningful relationship even though they are actually interested in men. While this boys may not be the most mature, they feel they have to express their dominance in any way they can, and that happens to come in the form of gay bashing, yet in a community where many individuals feel attracted to the same gender, why is it that this is still so prevalent? Even though they have loved ones and friends who are homosexuals, these boys, and in some instances girls, still feel the need to protect their gender through insults. It is clear that these kids are extremely self-conscious, and it bothers me that they feel this is the only way to express their gender identity. It is really not healthy for these teenagers to think and talk this way, especially to the ones they care about who are gay.
ReplyDelete