|
||||
|
July 21, 2001 The recent murder of a transgendered teen has brought prejudice against non-heterosexuals to the public’s attention once again. That case has not been concluded, and so it’s early yet to be discussing what thoughts might have gone through the mind of his killer. In the 1998 murder of University of Wyoming student Matthew Shepard near Laramie, we do have some idea what happened. Shepard’s assailants were disturbed by what they perceived as his homosexual advances toward them. They convinced themselves that they had been so grievously injured that they were justified in torturing and killing him. Both are serving life sentences in the Wyoming Penitentiary. Reactions spawned in a bar are far less logical than those considered carefully in the light of day. Why, though, is such stigma attached to being a nonparticipatory object of someone’s sexual attraction? The knee-jerk reaction of loathing has a strong component of fear. "What if someone’s watching? What if my friends think I’m gay?" For young people who are just beginning to explore their own sexuality, that can be an extremely frightening possibility, particularly if they’ve been socially conditioned to believe that homosexuality is a fate worse than death. It’s a lot easier to hate those we don’t understand, and we don’t understand those we never get to know. Why have some people developed the opinion that male homosexuals are seeking sex from every man they meet? Why are people so willing to believe the myth that homosexuals are more likely than heterosexuals to molest children? Why is the heterosexuality portrayed as 40-hour a week jobs and a white picket fence while "the homosexual lifestyle" is described almost entirely in terms of sexual activity? If we’ve learned anything over the past decades, we should have learned that people across the entire spectrum of sexual orientation learn, work, worship, shop and have fun together without displaying inappropriately overt sexuality. Sexuality is not "caught" during conversation; otherwise gays would be reluctant to interact with non-gays for fear their sexuality would somehow "wear off." The entire idea is ludicrous. No matter how one feels about homosexuality — and we recognize that for some people, objections are part of a system of religious beliefs — society does not benefit by portraying gays as people who exist only to subvert the civil order and corrupt our young people. It simply isn’t true. To lead teens to believe that they’ll be somehow tainted by talking to a gay or lesbian, or that their lives will be ruined if they’re suspected of being homosexual, is to drive some unstable young people to despairing thoughts and desperate actions. No one’s life is defined entirely by his or her sexuality. No one’s reputation is harmed by interacting calmly and civilly with other human beings. It’s possible — in fact, essential, in a civil society — to hold a negative opinion of someone’s behavior without falling prey to myths, panic and violence. There should be no negative social consequences to acting with basic decency toward others. The Golden Rule still applies. Brainwashing our youth to believe they are contaminated by association with someone who is different than they — and the differences extend far beyond sexuality — subjects them to unrealistic fears. It creates victims out of healthy teens. Growing up is difficult enough, sexulaity should not be presented as a reason for terror. |
||||
|
Copyright © 2001 the Cortez Journal.
All rights reserved. |
