Lab
See how this opinion breaks down by gender, political spectrum and generation — and who shares your view.
Gender
18 comments
My two LGBTQ+ friends walked into my room and said, “Ew, your room is so painfully straight.” It was a typical room designed to my tastes. It was baby blue and had wall art of European landscapes and plants. I could not say anything. I was offended. This is just one of the many statements I had to hear.
LGBTQ+ discrimination exists. But these days so does heterosexual discrimination. Emotions are always running high in situations like this. It is not easy to say something in your defense because you are scared you might offend this person. I have had to take blatantly rude comments like this from many of my classmates.
I overheard a conversation in a shared room with a classmate. She said, “Straight people are the most boring people I have met.” There have been many instances where heterosexual people have been called boring or “not adventurous.”
I have seen many people call heterosexual men bigots and uptight. These blanket statements are unjust. Heterosexual women are often accused of being too “vanilla” in their sexual practices. They are viewed as too dull in their dating and clothing preferences. It is not okay to discriminate against heterosexuals. The same applies to the LGBTQ+. It is a two-way street.
Most dictionaries define discrimination as treating people with prejudice based on certain characteristics they exhibit, and I think this example fits the definition of discrimination.
I agree that Discrimination against straight people is common. The LGBTQ+ community's whole message is that people should be able to love who they want to love but when a straight person does not want to date a transgender person they are labeled as transphobic. How does this fit into their message? I support LGBTQ+ couples and they are free to like whoever they want but personally as a straight female I a preference for straight males. Condemning straight individuals for not wanting to date/like a transgender person is basically the same as me condemning and gay person for not dating/liking the opposite gender. Being gay, straight, bi is all one's own opinion and they have their own preferences. If my preference is to date a person that was born a male then that is my preference and that should be respected. Labeling and condemning me is not only making me dislike the community but also basically forcing me to date a transgender person which then throws the whole message of being free to love who you want out the window.
make it make sense.
Discrimination is no casual word. It implies harmful consequences beyond simple grievances and negative attitudes. One group must actively or implicitly cause harm to another to justify the use of the ugly word. Homophobia and heterophobia may sound like two sides of a coin, two issues with similar magnitudes. They are not. Far from it. Homophobia represents a present, significant and overwhelming threat to the LGBTQ+ community. Heterophobia does not constitute significant harm to qualify as discrimination.
What does homophobia mean? It means your right to marriage came down to one vote of a heterosexual judge only six years ago.[1] It means in 29 U.S. states you can legally lose employment, housing, or public accommodations for their orientation.[2] You can become a target in approximately 16.7% of all hate crimes in the United States.[3] You can legally receive forced conversion therapy, a pseudo-scientific and harmful practice, in 20 states.[4] You can be refused services at the discretion of the business owners.[5] You may not be able to adopt a child in 20 states.[6] While progress has represented the past decade for LGBTQ+ rights, homophobia still perpetuates every aspect of daily life and causes significant harm for LOBTQ+ people.
What harm has heterophobia done? How have you suffered when someone casually labeled you “straight”? How have you suffered when a crossdresser is performing on TV? How have you suffered when your way of life no longer dominates the media and pop culture? What significant harm can and will an antagonistic gay person do to you when you hold the upper hand in every aspect of society?
Power enables harm, and harm constitutes discrimination. Between straight people and the LGBTQ+ group, only one holds the power and is capable of discrimination. Heterophobia represents a license for the privilege. It gives excuses to resist social change, to retain power and space not entitled to straight people in the first place. Calling it discrimination is factually, morally, and historically wrong.
[1]. Liptak, Adam. 2015. "Supreme Court Ruling Makes Same-Sex Marriage A Right Nationwide". The New York Times, , 2015. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/27/us/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage.html.
[2]. "LGBTQ Americans Aren't Fully Protected From Discrimination In 29 States". 2021. Freedom For All Americans. https://freedomforallamericans.org/states/.
[3]. Human Rights Watch. 2020. "NEW FBI HATE CRIMES REPORT SHOWS INCREASES IN ANTI-LGBTQ ATTACKS New FBI Hate Crimes Report Shows Increases In Anti-LGBTQ Attacks". https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/new-fbi-hate-crimes-report-shows-increases-in-anti-lgbtq-attacks.
[4]. "Conversion Therapy Bans By U.S. State". 2021. Born Perfect. https://bornperfect.org/facts/conversion-therapy-bans-by-state/.
[5]. Barnes, Robert. 2019. "Supreme Court Passes On Case Involving Baker Who Refused To Make Wedding Cake For Same-Sex Couple". The Washington Post, , 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-passes-on-new-case-involving-baker-who-refused-to-make-wedding-cake/2019/06/17/f78c5ae0-7a71-11e9-a5b3-34f3edf1351e_story.html.
[6]. "Foster And Adoption Laws". 2021. Lgbtmap.Org. https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/foster_and_adoption_laws.
Discrimination means “the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, sex, or disability.” The extent of discrimination depends on what we are talking about. Members of the LGBTQ+ community are discriminated against to a much larger extent than heterosexual members. This does not mean there is no discrimination at all.
I agree there is less harm. My argument is not one that says, “my hose is bigger than yours.” It is evident that LGBTQ+ discrimination is the bigger horse. The argument is that another horse exists also. The argument does not say that heterosexual people have suffered. We have not. My argument is to inform the audience that heterosexual discrimination exists. Period.
People are capable of discriminating against heterosexuals but in a minor way. This is because they have suffered enough at the hands of heterosexual people. To reiterate my point. It is not about the extent of discrimination, but merely the fact that it exists. This in no way attacks any community or tries to play the victim card.
In my argument, there is no mention of any phobia. Phobia and discrimination are two very different things. My argument states that there is a certain extent of heterosexual discrimination present these days. It is important to realize and notice that other forms of discrimination exist. They might not be as bad.
I am not saying that this is an issue that needs to be addressed. People should be aware and mindful of the comments they make about heterosexual individuals. There is no heterophobia here. I do not believe that Heterophobia is present. I do not think it can exist. Heterophobia and homophobia is not the argument.
Again, this is not discounting the fact that LGBTQ+ members suffer discrimination. Just because one group suffers discrimination does not mean we can eliminate or dismiss other forms of discrimination. If we want to progress as a society, we need to be aware of all conditions of discomfort we cause to people.
I would say that using the “my horse is bigger than yours” explanation to be indifferent to other sorts of minor discrimination is morally wrong.
We're in one of the most potent arguments of today: what counts as discrimination.
To the Right, as you say @Sanjana, discrimination is "the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people".
To the Left, it's the same PLUS POWER. You can't discriminate unless you hold the cards.
I think fixing the discrimination issue will come from a radical reinterpretation of the word, instead of reinforcing the discriminatory framework that guides conversations like these Instead of framing conversations with "my oppression is worse than your oppression" or "I can hurt you because your position in society allows you to oppress me" we should realize that there can be productive discrimination.
By recognizing difference and focussing on the actual source of oppression (in this case based on gender/sexuality) we can actually do productive, reformative work.
To avoid unnecessary discussions about wordings, let's use your definition of discrimination (one that does not require harm). In this case, I do concede there is heterosexual discrimination. However, I want to inquiry you on two matters.
First, it appears to me that straight discrimination differs from LGBTQ+ discrimination not just by degree. Instead, the two are categorically different. LGBTQ+ discrimination is systemic. It perpetuates important institutions in our society. Straight discrimination is personal. It goes from people to people. There are no laws, regulations, or prevalent pressures against straight people from actors such as the government, churches, or the private sector. This distinction is important because only systemic issues require systemic solutions. In other words, this distinction would mean any social movement of sexuality equality should still focus on LGBTQ+ discrimination.
Second, it appears to me that straight discrimination stems from heteronormativity. LGBTQ+ groups have received active derogatory portray from society. Myths have seen them as pedophiles, HIV infected, etc. On the other hand, most generalizations of straight people come from outdated standards of heteronormativity. In other words, the derogatory insults of straight people are not the active creations of LGBTQ+ people. Instead, they used the heteronormative standards in a negative tone. For example, the idea that straight people are "boring at sex" comes from the heteronormative standard that sees straight as the default. This conclusion is significant because it establishes heteronormativity as the root problem in the discussion of sexuality discourse. In other words, straight discrimination is not separate but a byproduct of our society's questionable expectations of heterosexuality.
Overall, under your definition of discrimination, I concur with your arguments. However, I raise the two issues above for your attention.
This is an excellent counter-argument! I think my conclusion stays the same. I do agree with your point about systematic discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community.
Still, discrimination exists in both communities and against two communities, whether it is personal or systemic.
Like @ellikara91 said, "it is important to keep in mind that it is not a matter of which discrimination is 'bigger,' but the impact of such comments (based on sexual orientation) on a person's psychology/life is considered significant harm, regardless of whether it is not widespread."
It is a matter that needs attention and awareness because, as @ellikara91 said, discrimination can grow quickly and profoundly impact a person's confidence in their sexuality.
tldr; Everyone is harmed by how society treats gender and sexuality, but decreasing that harm will come from productive discrimination not reinforcing the destructive discriminatory framework.
I understand the point that @sanjana is talking about. Conversations like these often turn into (as @sanjana has noted) one about "my horse is bigger than yours." This is harmful because it reinforces a world where we rank each others oppression/suffering and become distracted from the fact that, all those having that conversation are oppressed/suffering.
However, I do not want to encourage a false equivalency. I think it is more useful to acknowledge these kinds of statements and give them their proper weight in the discussion. For example, we can say straight people are discriminated agains. It is an important point that highlights a more inclusive, and I think mere important, issue. We, as a society, discriminate based on gender/sexuality and that includes straight people.
We should acknowledge the truth in this statement, but qualify it. Another example: women and men experience sexual violence, but women experience it to a higher degree. Therefore, we should be trying to change society so that we decrease overall sexual violence with special care towards women.
Discrimination also means the "recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another." Equality won't come from color blindness or ignoring difference, but from trying to counteract destructive discrimination with productive discrimination.
I think being 'stuck' in definitions of discrimination and laying out the science is not going to help here because it prevents us from seeing the bigger picture. What Sanjana refers to here is an example of reverse discrimination, which has a legitimate definition as a phenomenon.
When we talk about examples of discrimination like Sanjana's, it is important to keep in mind that it is not a matter of which discrimination is 'bigger', but the impact of such comments (based on sexual orientation) on a person's psychology/life is considered significant harm, regardless of whether it is not widespread. Sanjana did not minimise the impact of discrimination towards LGBTQ+, she just stated an example of discrimination from her personal experience, which is not an isolated phenomenon I should say because it has happened to people I also know.
Indeed, people tend to discriminate against people, and it can happen to anyone. But we should be careful not to underestimate any kind of discrimination, especially when discrimination can have the tendency to grow, just as we should recognise the different kinds and amounts of discrimination that exist and affect people's lives.
I absolutely agree, @ellikara91! You understood my argument perfectly, thank you!
What is 'productive discrimination'? (i've googled but can't find!)
On 'whose horse is bigger', the Left's argument (so nicely put by @ywang) is that unless you are structurally oppressed you just don't have a horse. Yes, you may be teased for your whiteness, or maleness or straightness, but that is not discrimination. And framing it as discrimination confuses the business of fixing it by muddying the problem (and, they'd argue, devaluing its seriousness)?
I'm a political scientist so I like to make up new terms lol, but in hindsight it probably wasn't necessary.
The point I was trying to make was better put by @ellikara91 when they said "we should be careful not to underestimate any kind of discrimination, especially when discrimination can have the tendency to grow, just as we should recognise the different kinds and amounts of discrimination that exist and affect people's lives."
And to your point I disagree that framing it as discrimination in this context muddies the waters. In this context op is trying to highlight the discrimination based on gender/sexuality. Its not systemic discrimination, but op was treated differently based on their sexuality. I think it is important to realize the potential for hurtful language to grow into a much bigger problem. We should be wary of that.(To clarify what I mean by progressive discrimination. I'm thinking something similar to affirmative action but more nuanced, because I think simplifying the issue down to 'you're discriminated against or you're not.' Is too simple. I don't have a solution, but this framing doesn't sit right with me either)
I get that.
Maybe we do need another word then.
'Discrimination' for prejudice which leads to systemically worse life outcomes - racism kills blacks up to a decade earlier than whites, eg.
'Boxing' or 'Teasing' or something else for prejudice 'up'? What would you use?
I think in this scenario bullying probably fits the bill but I'm still not totally sure if there isn't already some way to give a name for "prejudice 'up'."
I mean, people have been using things like "straight" to vent their frustrations or even scapegoat at times, which does paint an overly-broad brush.
But it certainly isn't common for that to be put into discriminatory action. That's not to say that it hasn't or couldn't have been used that way. But to say it's "common" is certainly stretching.
The issue is that news outlets are aware that people are wary of this sort of language, and jump at the chance to report on the few scenarios where this happens.
Remember to take news with a grain of salt. Insecurities garner clicks. A fear that non-straight people are seeking revenge on straight people is enough to built a whole website.
It's clear discrimination has increased over the years against straight people but to say it's common is tricky. Partly because LGBTQ+ still make a small percentage of the world. So if we assume a small percentage of that small percentage are discriminatory, in the real world the chances of you being discriminated against by a non-straight person is extremely low
Make the case or invite a friend to comment!