Skip to main content

The ability to hide in plain sight

One of the benefits of being a cis white male is that frequently, erasure and invisibility benefit me even when it's happening to me. 

For example: I'm a white cis male. I have a beard and a reasonably deep voice. I don't think I've ever been misgendered. What I'm not is straight; I've been bisexual for as long as I can remember, before I even knew it was a thing. But! I'm in a committed, monogamous relationship with a cis woman which from the outside looks like a straight couple. I also tend to prefer the word "queer" to any specific explicit definition in conversations, so sometimes others can make assumptions that don't necessarily follow.

So when people look at my life, they don't see the queer parts. They see me as a white dude in a happy hetero marriage and that benefits me because it means that I'm more likely to be seen as part of the 'in group' when dealing with things like bosses, money, taxes, etc. White straight dudes don't see me as a threat; they instead see me as a fellow traveler and treat me as such in regards to things like job offers and the like. Nevermind that two seconds with my Twitter feed will disabuse them of the idea, or if they just asked me I'd honestly say that I'm often more identified with out-groups.

Which is explicitly not to say that I'm oppressed (over and above the ways we are all oppressed by white supremacy and patriarchy); I get many, many benefits for people not seeing my queerness. I like to think that I work hard to make sure that the voice that I promote is not mine, but rather I use my voice and my position to lift up others and give them a platform and a loudspeaker.

I have no idea what I originally meant to aim for when I started this. I guess I just wanted to point out that even the people who "look normal" often have stuff going on behind the scenes, and sometimes that means they're not actually on your side, for good or ill.

Anyway, there's my word salad for the day.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Money and Happiness as a fungible resource

Money really does buy happiness. Anyone who tells you differently has a vested interest in keeping you poor, unhappy, or both. I know this because I grew up on the ragged edge of poor, and then backed my way into a career in IT, which is where the modern world keeps all the money that isn't in Finance. So I am one of the extreme minority of Generation X that actually had an adulthood that was markedly more financially stable than my parents. And let me tell you: money really does buy happiness. To be clear: at 45 years old, I'm now in a relationship and a period of my life where our household is effectively double-income, no kids. I live in the city, but I own a house, and can only afford to do that because of our combined income. We also have two cars -- one new, one used (though neither of them is getting driven very much these days) -- and we have a small discretionary budget every month for things like videogames, books, and the like. What my brother used to call DAM -- Dic

Occasional Media Consumption: Man of Steel (2013)

Every so often, there's a movie where I watch it and think, "that was pretty bad", and then time goes by, and I see other people talking about it, and so I watch it again, thinking I was too harsh on it, and after watching it again, I think "not only was that movie bad, it was worse  than I remember". I try very hard not to hate-watch anything, movies or TV or whatever, because that's a waste of time, energy, and emotion. My expectation was that my first reading of this film was overblown, that my reaction to it was as an outsider, someone who didn't know the depth and breadth of the Clark Kent / Kal-El story, and who couldn't appreciate the subtleties or easter eggs or whatever. But in the intervening years, I've read a bunch of DC comics, and many of them Superman comics. And I've come to a conclusion upon rewatching this movie, one that surprised me given the budget, the cast, and the story being told. Rarely has any movie so misunderstood

Occasional Media Consumption: Justice League (2017)

So let's get this out of the way first: this movie is bad. I mean, it's bad . And not in the way that most superhero movies are bad, though it is bad in that way too: inconsistent characterizations, lack of understanding of motivations, weirdly-shot fight scenes, dodgy use of CG, etc. I mean, it is bad in all of these ways too, especially the whole thing where they digitally removed a mustache from Henry Cavill, who's honestly doing his best with a bad script and a character he's fundamentally unsuited to play. Gail Godot, in an iconic roll for her, suddenly shoved out of the way to make room for (also fundamentally-miscast) Ben Affleck's the Batman and Cavill's Superman, And Ray Fisher and Ezra Miller trying to introduce characters that honestly deserve their own movies. Jason Momoa's Aquaman got his own movie, but as far as I can tell he's just stepped into this one from a whole different universe and is basically pretending to live in the grim-n-gritt