Monday, June 27, 2005

Maybe someone should ask him?

Here's something that Brash has just brought into sharp focus: National is standing its first openly gay candidate this election: Chris Finlayson in Mana. Maybe someone should ask him how he feels about his leader's position that gay New Zealanders are not part of the "mainstream"...


See now this is interesting. Given that most people aren't gay, most people are heterosexual, you could claim heterosexuality as "mainstream", as in "mainly people are heterosexual". This wouldn't be a judgement per se on the morality of people, but a comment on the majority of human sexual behaviors.

Somehow, saying that "most people bonk the other sex" has become taboo, even when it's quite true. I mean, even being an MP isn't mainstream, given there are a finite number of them out of four million people. I mean, being in retail or serving burgers is more mainstream than being an MP.

Even the term "queer" as a self referential title indicates a tangent from the mainstream, given the history of the word, queer, as in odd or unusual.

Is being told you aren't mainstream really so insulting? Is being observed to be unusual in some way really so dangerous to say?

I just don't see the terrible victimisation here.

Posted by Muerk : 6/28/2005 04:45:00 PM

It's the context, not the specific word. "Mainstream" is virtually meaningless in itself, and at the moment it's being used to promote division and to legitimise ignoring the real needs and rights of minorities.

Posted by Commie Mutant Traitor : 6/28/2005 05:29:00 PM

Nah... Not convinced. Brash - for all I disagree with him - did put "mainstream" into a specific context, one where it was a statement that being gay was not the majority sexual behavior. Which is true.

Now I agree with Idiot here, that this was a Private Members Bill, not a Labour inititive. But that's a judgement on Labour.

And perhaps the reason that no one has touted National's gay man, is because, really, no one cares about his sexual preferences apart from people wanting to make political hay.

In which case being gay in New Zealand isn't some terrible scandal that victimises you and leaves you with no rights, helpless and hopeless at the mercy of oppression.

Posted by Muerk : 6/29/2005 10:21:00 AM

Muerk -

Back in the real world, private members bills go into the ballot for all kinds of reasons — including highly contentious social issues that the Government of the day don't want seen as 'Government legislation'. If it passes, well you take the political credit. If it fails, or is about as popular as crabs in a brothel, you have what Nixon called 'plausible deniability'.

Now I don't want to speak for Mr. Finalyson, but this openly gay Nat is perfectly happy not being a member of either some statistical 'mainstream' or a professional 'minority group' victim that requires patronising condescendtion.

I've got bigger fish to fry that hysterical parsing of one of Sean Plunkett's lame Moaning Retort screech-fests.

Posted by Craig Ranapia : 6/30/2005 10:01:00 AM