Glee Forum

Watching #glee (which is a much more clever show than you might think, if you don't watch it) - will there ever be a time on this planet, when people (incl. parents) don't care what your sexual preference or interest is?

Religion and (tribal) culture - "accomplishments", thinking in historic dimensions - equally are responsible for intolerance and exclusion. They kept the 'group' safe from influences that could damage the integrity of a group, but the price was bloody(1)(2). Sexual politics(3) play a huge part in defining "social" space. Controlling the behavior, controlling the bodies. Denying personal, individual choices.

One might think, in the 21. Century, we would have put these patterns behind us; we could define us - as individuals - without degrading the 'other'(4). But in the end, in many parts of the world, people still live in the Middle Ages - only now, with cell-phones & Internet. And the concept of "individualism"(5) is still pretty 'young' in 'their' view(6).

1. René Girard: La Violence et le Sacré (1972) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Girard

2. René Girard: 40 min video Interview about his general concepts http://fora.tv/2009/12/01/Uncommon_Knowledge_Ren_Girard

3. Kate Millett: Sexual Politics (1970) http://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/millett-kate/sexual-politics.htm

4. Emmanuel Levinas http://171.67.193.20/entries/levinas/#TraOthSam

5. Aaron Gurevich: The Origins of European Individualism (1995) http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0631179631.html

6. Peter Gabriel "Not One Of Us" http://youtu.be/_ECYi-tgWps

Even if degradation is removed from the relationship, sexual politics will always affect someone's relationships with others. As a straight man, women treat me differently from if I were a gay man. They're a bit more guarded, leery of either leading me on if they're not interested or coming on too strong if they are. As a gay man, they don't have to worry about that, and they can relax.

We are all defined by our sociological and mental traits. Being of a sexual orientation is not a physical trait whether you believe in nature or nurture; the only people who might believe that orientation is physical are those who see homosexuality as some sort of disease. Religion, politics, orientation, tastes, personality...these will all always "matter" even if they aren't sources of enmity or bigotry. Individualism is something to be respected, but love for all mankind is simply not a trait anyone can have. For example, I can't love violent people.

... ah, I asked for it ...

... it's hard to discuss such things with complete strangers on the Internet, without agreeing to some certain definitions first.

• if we are all defined by our "sociological and mental traits", then it is our choice (not our bodies). What does it tell us about our societies, then? We endorse bullying, sexual harassment, unequal pay, abuse, etc, etc? It's ok?
• what if you deny sexual politics - incl. biological desires, equally, as your cultural flirtation skills? (at work, you are suppose to do exactly that)
• "violent people"? Who are those? You never hit anyone in your life? Your parents did neither? People can be violent at times and also loving, non-violent, at other times? And then there is non-physical violence which can be as violent?

I don't deny the existence of 100s of millions of years of sexual diversity and biology - I am saying it's much more complicated then male & female and what defines male and female is not up for 'me' to decide. It also should not be a mob (family, tribe, society, religion, even law), telling individuals if it's 'ok' or not to be who they are and do what they want to do, unless their intent is to harm others (more likely, "they" are the ones being harmed. Never seen a group of gay men hunting the Aryan Nation, but maybe they exist).

Mos Eisley Cantina

I have this 'ideal place' in mind - it's an Utopian space, I know that - of the Mos Eisley Cantina (at least, the first few minutes, where all species drink together in piece, before the Jedi's & Han Solo fuck it all up).

Over the years our social interactions move more and more to the virtual space (times spent on the Internet, while sitting at home, on a train (not paying attention to the "meat-world")). This is an opportunity to acknowledge that it does not matter (that much anymore), what you look like, what you sound like, what your sexual preference is, etc ... I interact with people on the Internet, I would probably never speak in person with, BUT, doing it on the web t e a c h e s me, that there is m o r e than I see. The biological tricks our bodies play with us (feeling attracted or disgusted by the physical presence of someone) are more transparent. Easier to understand. Their legitimacy easier to question.

Equally, the household we grow up in, the values, we are taught by our parents, family, local (urban) tribe, friends ... may not be the 'real deal'. May be just something, we are accustomed to and play along with, to feel included. Questioning your place in society, questioning the values of your society is a rite-de-passage in itself?What I was trying to point at - besides a bunch of links - is the irony that 'culture' and 'religion' are seen as (undeniably) accomplishments of human kind, yet these very same accomplishments are responsible for hate and pain. They are social systems defining who 'we' are and regulating and oppressing 'the others'. Way too easy, to break the patterns, if we see the patterns?

And to come back to GLEE; Glee is a fine show, exposing such patterns (Kurt, Coach, Santana, Puck), when all they need to do right now is just being a vehicle for FOX & their iTunes sales.