It’s misogyny, not homophobia
In Mediterranean societies like Malta’s, attacks on homosexual women are not homophobic but misogynistic. That’s one of the reasons why, despite homosexual men being far more in evidence than homosexual women, two-thirds of all incidents have involved homosexual women and just one-third have involved homosexual men.
Men in macho societies attack homosexual women because what they see is women who are rejecting men. And that is why the attack will often include some form of sexual assault, which is an attempt at saying ‘Here, take what you claim not to want.’
When macho thugs attack homosexual men, they do not feel the need to force them to have some kind of sexual encounter with a woman or even to taunt them about it. They accept that these are men who only want other men. They don’t like it, they see it as an affront to their own sexuality, but still they accept it.
But when macho thugs are confronted by women who only want other women, they can’t accept it. They see it as a conscious decision to reject men, and this fires up the latent or overt misogyny with which they were raised.
Homosexual women were always going to have a much harder time in Malta than homosexual men, precisely because they are women. I don’t know why anybody is surprised.
22 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
To be honest I never came across the word misogyny, so I went to my dictionary, which said that it means ‘man who hates woman’.
I doubt if this is the right meaning: take from me, I do not hate women; actually quite the contrary, but on the other hand I have no liking for homosexuals,lesbians included.
So where does that place me?
[Daphne – Firmly in the box tagged ‘typical of your generation and cultural background’, Silvio. Nothing exceptional there, so don’t worry yourself unduly. And misogyny isn’t actually hatred. It’s more complicated than that: it’s a mixture of fear and suspicion and feeling threatened, rather than straightforward hatred.]
Churchill was a misogynist and he never accepted Lady Astor’s presence and wit in the House of Commons.
Thanks, Daphne – one way or other, you always manage to make my day.
Silvio, I think the word you’re looking for is ‘bigot’. Look it up.
Silvio, I’m not fussed if you have no liking for homosexuals. I have no liking for stupid ignorant closed-minded bigots for example.
It’s good to know that I am not the only one suffering from one kind of phobia or another.
May I suggest a good way of overcoming yours. You have first to look very closely at one of the stupid etc.. who you do not like, and you would be surprised how much alike you look.
As for Sap, yes I met many homosexuals etc in my time, and I can assure I always treated them the way they deserved.
Thanks for your suggestion, but no thank you. I decide to keep those kind of people at bay to safeguard my sanity.
In the same way you treat homosexuals the way you think they deserve, I too treat people falling under aforementioned description with the utmost disdain they deserve, when I come across one of them because I can’t do otherwise.
So, should we ever cross paths, it would be best for you to avoid me.
@David II
You say that you treat people not to your liking with ” the disdain they deserve”. This is very different from the way I treat mine.
I treat them the way “they deserve” – mostly pity, considering they need help, and at the same time with Christian charity, knowing that it is not their fault for being born with such a perversion.
You say that it would be best for me to “avoid you”.
On the contrary, I will do my best to meet you, as I feel I should try, again to help you out of your phobia.
It is the least I can do for anyone, before matters turn for the worse, then it will be too late.
@Silvio
It’s funny you should use the word ‘phobia’ in your argument, as mine is nothing like fear. I actually eat people like you for breakfast.
I am one of those you think deserve your pity. Well, if I were a timesofmalta.com commentator, I would tell you very graphically what to do with your pity, but since I’d like to spare the readers of this blog from vulgarity, I’ll just tell you that you can keep it as I certainly need none of it.
My sexuality has never come in the way of me having a great life, a healthy relationship, good career prospects, good salary, good education, fantastic family and friends (yes, even heterosexual ones, I don’t live in a ghetto) and lots of beautiful things to look forward to in my future. But guess what, I would have had none of the above if I gave any importance to the pathetic judgements of people like you, who have this condescending feeling that gay people are children of a lesser God. The only gay people who deserve pity are those who treat the opinion of people like you with importance, rather than the strip of bog roll it deserves to be treated as, and hence this inhibits them from living a life of fulfilment.
As for the doing your best to meet me bit, it’s really not necessary. I’d rather dedicate my time to positive people, than people like you riddled with prejudices and judgements which, quite frankly, I’m not interested in.
Hence, I rest my case.
@david ll
Could the fact that you eat people like me for breakfast is what is causing all your problems?
You did not heed my last suggestion, but I ask you to consider this one.
Try cereals for breakfast, and be sure to add some sugar, as it is considered as food for the brain.
I am happy for you that, as you say, you have it all – perhaps not really all, but as long as you have learned to live with your shortcomings, you might, as you say, look forward to a good future, one way or another.
@ silvio:
Could it be that people who are overly concerned about other people’s sexuality actually have shortcomings in that department themselves?
I wanted to write this comment on your previous blog about the Arriva attack case, but never got round to it. So here it goes now.
Have you ever seen two women being overly affectionate in public? Have you ever seen them doing much more than hug, hold hands or maybe sneak a peck on the cheek, or if it’s dark a superfast one on the lips?
Cause I haven’t, and very much exposed to ‘the’ gays.
All the gay women I know (and I know a lot) won’t even hold hands in public because of the presumed ‘bad looks’ they would get, or because someone in their family or at work doesn’t know about their sexuality and therefore they don’t risk being seen.
So, based on this experience, I found it very annoying that people automatically assumed that the girls on that bus were up to no good and showing exaggerated PDAs. If we don’t know what actually happened I would be more inclined to speculate that it wasn’t much, because that’s usually the case, and I would rather not judge on speculated exception.
Having said that, had the girls been French kissing I still wouldn’t have justified the dispatcher’s comment…. He would never have said anything to a straight couple doing the same thing. As you rightly pointed out, he would have sat tight and squirmed right through it, but he wouldn’t have said anything….again I’m speculating based on general experience, but I wouldn’t want to judge the dispatcher on assumed exception either.
Alison, you’re writing about your own experience with your friends (I don’t use ‘gay’ because I don’t care if they are straight or actually). I agree with you that they do not show their emotions (like kissing or holding hands) in public, unless they feel safe with those around them.
I don’t agree with D when she wrote that “despite men being far more in evidence than women, two-thirds of all incidents have involved women and just one-third have involved men.” Can you imagine a man reporting he was either beaten or harassed to the police? If, one the other hand a woman filed a report to the police, she may find they are more sympathetic.
I watched a lady and a man (both s) on Sellili the other week and I agreed with the man when he said that it’s nobody’s business what happens in your neighbor’s bedroom. And it’s exactly THIS the point here. These things are best done in private, by both heterosexuals and s. I feel disgusted when I have to watch two french kissing and touching on the bus. I usually get up and find another place and leave them to it especially if I’m with my daughter. As I said these things are best done in private; I don’t care what X, Y, or Z does in private, it’s their life, but please do spare us from watching you on a bus.
There are men who tend to hate even hetero women who live independently without a man in a fulfilled life.
You may have no liking for homosexuals but over the course of your life you’ve met many even without knowing…at work, in the street, at the hospital, perhaps even at home.
I agree. This is also the product of a society that would much rather chastise its daughters than its “infallible” sons.
The victim-blaming mentality that supports this system (i.e. “Couples who feel they are considered to be unconventional by society – like homosexual couples or black/white couples – sometimes actually do this sort of thing with the express purpose of provoking just this kind of upset emotions in those watching, and even an angry reaction so that they can say ‘See? This is the kind of prejudice we have to put up with.’”) makes it much easier for outrageous false equivalencies to be affirmed by the law:
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/en/newsdetails/news/national/Gay-victims-to-face-charges-of-breaching-public-peace-after-attackers-file-police-report-20120213
I would add that there is resentment rather than hatred.
My concern is that the gay community may be negatively affected by a few of its members behaving inappropriately in public. Behaviour more suited to private quarters is distasteful and discomfiting to others, whether that behaviour is straight or gay.
Flaunting sexual behaviour in public is inappropriate, whatever the sexual tendencies. This trend is unfortunately prevalent.
They have ‘corrective rape’ (by men) of lesbians in South Africa.
What is seen as provocative, inappropriate behaviour is no more than a reaction to oppression (ever heard of a child being told not to do something and they do it even more, ‘to spite their oppressor’?).
In the sexual arena, this is unfortunate.
Taking gay men as an example, they react to the extreme with non-stop promiscuity (they may be gay but they behave exactly like straight men and we know what they are like.
What is looked down upon in the heterosexual world is thus celebrated in the homosexual one. So, promiscuous behaviour, whether overt or in private, is like giving the finger to an oppressive society.
And with no models to emulate, the homosexual feels free to behave as he pleases. And this to a two-pronged oppression, ie Church and Society(people may not be particularly religious but the Church’s overt disapproval of homosexuality is not lost on them because it suits the situation. Bigotry/hypocrisy at its worst).
This connects, however vaguely to, ‘cutting your nose to spite your face’. If homosexuality were more readily accepted as a non-issue (which it goddamn well should be), there would be less reason for homosexuals to react and over-react by by behaviour seemingly provocative when it is nothing of the sort. Some are paying with their lives and an unhealthy emotional state.
The bigots could not give a monkey’s. But then we do not live in a healthy society, exactly!. And that impacts on all of us, whatever/whoever we are. As the graffiti on the school-wall read, all those decades ago, gay oppression is class oppression.
And that affects me, thee and everybody else.
What is seen as provocative, inappropriate behaviour is no more than a reaction to oppression (ever heard of a child being told not to do something and they do it even more, ‘to spite their oppressor’?). In the sexual arena, this is unfortunate. Taking gay men as an example, they react to the extreme with non-stop promiscuity (they may be gay but they behave exactly like straight men and we know what they are like. What is looked down upon in the heterosexual world is thus celebrated in the homosexual one. So, promiscuous behaviour, whether overt or in private, is like giving the finger to an oppressive society. And with no models to emulate, the homosexual feels free to behave as he pleases. And this to a two-pronged oppression, ie Church and Society(people may not be particularly religious but the Church’s overt disapproval of homosexuality is not lost on them because it suits the situation. Bigotry/hypocrisy at its worst). This connects, however vaguely to, ‘cutting your nose to spite your face’. If homosexuality were more readily accepted as a non-issue (which it goddamn well should be), there would be less reason for homosexuals to react and over-react by by behaviour seemingly provocative when it is nothing of the sort. Some are paying with their lives and an unhealthy emotional state. The bigots could not give a monkey’s. But then we do not live in a healthy society, exactly!. And that impacts on all of us, whatever/whoever we are. As the graffiti on the school-wall read, all those decades ago, gay oppression is class oppression. And that affects me, thee and everybody else.
Straight men more commonly don’t accept that gay men are just men who prefer other men. It is true, however, that homosexual women are more of an affront to them and that sexual violence of a man on any woman is an attempt at domination – especially in such a case.
But macho men definitely don’t accept gay men and to them, gays are not complete men and many times are the object of ridicule.