By Joseph Couture (London, Ontario) NOV 5 | What turned out to be more disturbing than the recent crackdown by campus police at the University of Western Ontario on gay sex was the reaction of the community to the news.
Not long ago I reported how the police at UWO had been conducting an investigation into locations on campus where so-called "public sex" was happening between men. The most cruisey washroom on campus was redesigned to make it hostile to sex with the double doors removed, decency barriers installed in between the urinals and motion detectors placed above the toilet stalls. The frightening spectre that they had also placed cameras in the washroom was also raised. If that weren't bad enough, how the community responded to ( or failed to respond, actually) was even more frightening.
The first shock was when I called a group of local activists who initially said they were very concerned about the situation. But they very quickly back pedalled and said that they would not proceed to do anything unless they got more information. That would be reasonable except they said they were going to ask the local police to explain to them the truth of what was happening.They said they considered the police to be strong allies and without a clear indication from them that there was a problem, they would not act.
To be fair, it is true relations between the gay community and the police here have improved. But they are still the police. They may not specifically be targeting gays at this moment, but they are still agents of oppression in society. Remember the G20? To say that we now rely on them to tell us when we are being oppressed is like believing the fox when he says he says has best interests of the chickens at heart.
The students who run the gay group on campus either didn't answer requests for comment or said they would not go on record with their thoughts. What thoughts they did share off the record seemed to be mostly of fear and hesitation.
When I popped into the office of "the gay professor" on campus after my initial report was published, he seemed irritated, angry and overtly hostile and all but threw me out. Needless to say, he offered no help whatsoever.
Other local activists I attempted to enlist for support did not even return calls.I asked a group of Toronto activists for a statement. They said it would take them a couple of weeks to offer an official comment because they operate on a consensus basis and they would have to meet before deciding on what to say. One member told me they were hampered by the fact that despite having been formed more than a year ago, the group had not agreed on their mandate and consequently had trouble deciding what they should be involved in. This extreme delay rendered them irrelevant and useless in a breaking news story situation.
I openly wondered why no one would get involved or speak out. One acquaintance told me it was because it is 2010 and why should we still be defending such shameful acts as sex in washrooms. We shouldn't even be talking about such things because they make the community look bad.
But the interesting thing is that the straight students had no problem talking about their own acts of public sex. A few years ago the student newspaper published an article listing the best places on campus to have sex in public, including the library, cafeteria, business school classroom and, yes, the washrooms.
The article was a big hit with the students who went on to assign a point system in a competition to see who could have the most public sex.So here we have the double standard laid bare. When straight kids at the university have public sex, it is a joke and a competition. If gay guys do it, it is a crime worthy of police intervention.
The worst part is that it is the gay community itself who displays the biggest double standard. They also think it is a joke when the straights do it, but are ashamed and embarrassed to admit they do too and will gladly throw their own people to the wolves rather than defend themselves. What this displays is not the fact that in 2010 we no longer need to defend the seedy side of gay life, so much as it is clear that we believe all gay life is seedy.
We have become our own worst enemies and instead of attacking those who attack us, we criticize those who attempt to defend us.I can conclude only one thing from this: gay activism is dead. Those of us remaining who still believe in liberation and freedom seem totally isolated and defenceless. The fox now guards the henhouse and the chickens feel safer than ever.
The first shock was when I called a group of local activists who initially said they were very concerned about the situation. But they very quickly back pedalled and said that they would not proceed to do anything unless they got more information. That would be reasonable except they said they were going to ask the local police to explain to them the truth of what was happening.They said they considered the police to be strong allies and without a clear indication from them that there was a problem, they would not act.
To be fair, it is true relations between the gay community and the police here have improved. But they are still the police. They may not specifically be targeting gays at this moment, but they are still agents of oppression in society. Remember the G20? To say that we now rely on them to tell us when we are being oppressed is like believing the fox when he says he says has best interests of the chickens at heart.
The students who run the gay group on campus either didn't answer requests for comment or said they would not go on record with their thoughts. What thoughts they did share off the record seemed to be mostly of fear and hesitation.
When I popped into the office of "the gay professor" on campus after my initial report was published, he seemed irritated, angry and overtly hostile and all but threw me out. Needless to say, he offered no help whatsoever.
Other local activists I attempted to enlist for support did not even return calls.I asked a group of Toronto activists for a statement. They said it would take them a couple of weeks to offer an official comment because they operate on a consensus basis and they would have to meet before deciding on what to say. One member told me they were hampered by the fact that despite having been formed more than a year ago, the group had not agreed on their mandate and consequently had trouble deciding what they should be involved in. This extreme delay rendered them irrelevant and useless in a breaking news story situation.
I openly wondered why no one would get involved or speak out. One acquaintance told me it was because it is 2010 and why should we still be defending such shameful acts as sex in washrooms. We shouldn't even be talking about such things because they make the community look bad.
But the interesting thing is that the straight students had no problem talking about their own acts of public sex. A few years ago the student newspaper published an article listing the best places on campus to have sex in public, including the library, cafeteria, business school classroom and, yes, the washrooms.
The article was a big hit with the students who went on to assign a point system in a competition to see who could have the most public sex.So here we have the double standard laid bare. When straight kids at the university have public sex, it is a joke and a competition. If gay guys do it, it is a crime worthy of police intervention.
The worst part is that it is the gay community itself who displays the biggest double standard. They also think it is a joke when the straights do it, but are ashamed and embarrassed to admit they do too and will gladly throw their own people to the wolves rather than defend themselves. What this displays is not the fact that in 2010 we no longer need to defend the seedy side of gay life, so much as it is clear that we believe all gay life is seedy.
We have become our own worst enemies and instead of attacking those who attack us, we criticize those who attempt to defend us.I can conclude only one thing from this: gay activism is dead. Those of us remaining who still believe in liberation and freedom seem totally isolated and defenceless. The fox now guards the henhouse and the chickens feel safer than ever.
Posts
1 comments:
It gets back to the problem of liberating humans to accept sex as a natural activity.
Unfortunately various groups and individuals have hung a shroud of shame on the sexual act, which in fact is an attempt to oppress the freedom of sexual expression.
Liberating sex to be seen as a natural expression of affection between consenting people faces enormous challenges which most people avoid, because of the guilt that has been associated with such expressions.
Ultimately it is not only the right to be accepted and equal that is important, but the liberation for everyone, from the idea that it is morally necessary for sex to be hidden, oppressed and stigmatised.
In other words the whole of humanity, regardless of race, creed, religion or gender, is in need of liberating from the idea that sex is somehow 'naughty.'
That kind of activism is very much like putting the fox in with the chickens.
Post a Comment