Alone and Unobserved

“Why not just shut the he!! up about your sexual proclivity and become productive members of society.” (online comment on a recent news article about marriage equality)

Gays and gay-rights activists hear it all the time. “Why do you talk about your sexual preference all the time? You guys are sex-obsessed. You don’t hear us [heterosexuals] talking about that stuff!”

There are two responses to that: heterosexuals exhibit their sexual preference constantly, all the time, but don’t notice it; and in other cases, heterosexuals don’t need to make their sexual preference clear because theirs is the default/assumed orientation. American society (like most/all societies the world over) is deeply, fundamentally heteronormative. As with other kinds of privilege and bias, it is invisible to the majority, and may even be invisible to many in the homosexual minority. But think about it for a minute.

If you are heterosexual, you may have had to make a decision about when to tell people you are married/seeing someone. But if you are homosexual, talking about your significant other to people who don’t know you are gay is coming out. (In some places, such as the wonderful state I live in, it can get you fired or evicted. For instance.) Ditto to putting photos of your family on your desk at work or bringing your significant other to social functions.

If you are heterosexual, you grew up listening to stories and music that reaffirmed your sexual orientation again and again. If you are homosexual, you almost certainly did not. Love songs are overwhelmingly about heterosexual love. So are fairy tales. So are romance novels, and the love stories in films, and the love stories/marriages in religious texts.

If you are heterosexual, you have never worried about whether it’s safe to hold hands with your significant other in public because of his/her gender. If you are homosexual, that may be all you could think about the first time you went out on a date.

If you are heterosexual, your parents probably have the same sexual orientation you do. In fact, almost everyone you’ve known since you were a baby has had that same sexual orientation. If you are homosexual, this is almost certainly not the case.

If you are heterosexual, you probably have never been asked when you chose to be that way, or been told/had it implied that your sexual orientation is a choice and/or a sin. (If you have, it was probably a gay person ironically turning the tables on you.)

If you are heterosexual, you’ve probably never had to “come out” about your sexual orientation. If you have, those situation are probably few and far between (say, at a predominately gay party). If you are homosexual and you want to be out, you must constantly come out.

Gay people will always be a minority, wild-eyed religious/conservative rhetoric notwithstanding, which means that society will always be mostly heterosexual. But that doesn’t mean society needs to be heteronormative and heterosexist. And the way to try to achieve a mostly-heterosexual-but-not-heteronormative society is if gay people and gay allies make themselves known and make themselves heard.

Happy LGBT Pride Month. Come out as gay or as a gay ally today. Speak out. Make a difference.

Cross-posted as a comment on the Trembling Hand post “Why Women Don’t Make Games,” in which Tim Dean claims the reason more women don’t become computer programmers is because men are naturally better at math.

His argument, boiled down to its essentials:

Go read that blog post and then read this response.

Tim, while it’s clear that you read the data in the article, or at least a rough summary of the data, it sounds like you didn’t read the conclusion. [Or] if you did, you’ve chosen to ignore it.

It is true that the study shows a gender-based disparity in math scores at the higher end of the scale. However, the authors of the article don’t make any claims to understand *why* such a disparity exists, since their study didn’t address that question in the slightest. Instead, their conclusion is as follows:

“If educators and others are concerned about encouraging women to enter S&E [science, mathematics, and engineering] careers, the gender difference at the high end of the math score distribution is an important problem that must be addressed….

“Future researchers in this area should focus on identifying the determinants of this gender difference. Among the likely determinants are attitude changes toward math learning, social expectancies for math achievement, and social stereotyping of female students’ career options. Also, future research should use longitudinal panel data to examine math achievement change at the individual level. For example, a group of male and female students with above-average math achievement could be identified in eighth grade and followed as they progress through higher grades to determine whether the male students become progressively better in math achievement while the female students remain at the same level or become progressively worse.”

In other words, the data show a disparity; now it is up to further research to continue the research, and to determine possible causes *and remedies* for this disparity. Your conclusion (that there is a biological basis for the disparity and that it is irremediable) is a non sequitur.

I also take exception to your generalizing high-school-level mathematics scores to ability in higher mathematics. The kind of math studied in high school (even at the higher level) and actual higher mathematics are almost two completely different subjects. I have a master’s in math, and I tutored and TA’d college level math for years, and I never encountered a difference in ability between male and female students in math courses (including a number of CS/programming students) that could be easily reduced to purely biological terms.

Another part of the article that you ignored is the *opposite* gender-based disparity in the test scores of African-American students. Do you have some made-up racist explanation for that portion of the data to round out the sexism of your other made-up conclusions?

I’d like to add that there are several other problems with Tim’s assertions. One that immediately springs to mind is the fact that gender disparity in male-dominated occupations and gender disparity in female-dominated occupations are not parallel cases. Research shows that men do quite well in female-dominated occupations such as elementary education, nursing and librarianship, being promoted faster and higher and earning more money than their female coworkers. The same cannot be said of women in male-dominated occupations, where women are not promoted, and do not earn as much as their male coworkers. (See The Gendered Society by Kimmel for an entire book full of this kind of information.)

I have a straight female friend who regales me occasionally with tales of the latest Boy she is interested in, and I’m always fascinated by the things she takes for granted about her role in her dating relationships.

“I invited Boy A to go on a hike, because I know we both like hiking. Do you think I was too forward?”

or

“Boy B said I should let him know if there was a fun lecture I wanted to go to, but I’ve invited him to a chamber music performance instead. Do you think that looks too aggressive?”

or

“Boy C and I went out on a few dates, but then he didn’t call for two weeks. When he finally called I let him know that WASN’T OKAY.”

So, basically, a woman can ask a guy out, but she’s walking a fine line. If she’s too retiring and never takes a risk, maybe she won’t get dates; if she’s too outgoing, maybe she’ll be viewed as mannish and dominating, and she won’t get second dates. Of course, my friend’s last comment also shows the double standard men are held to: in the earliest stages of a relationship, the guy is supposed to call. If he doesn’t, the girl can call him… but she risks seeming desperate. Really she’s supposed to wait for him to call her. And if he doesn’t, she’s supposed to agonize over it with her friends for several days before (maybe!) picking up the phone.

Another straight female acquaintance, erinannie, recently wrote a short blog post in which she said, “If my marital status is always going to depend upon me making the first move, I’m going to be single forever.”

The commenters sympathized thusly:

“Why can’t boys just figure it out?” one said.

“You shouldn’t have to [make the first move]. Men need to be men,” wrote another.

And: “I am so tired of my guy friends telling me that I need to make the first move. I am not going to do their job!”

“Was I too forward?” “He didn’t call for two weeks.” “Men need to be men.” “I am not going to do their job.” Once again, I’m glad I’m not heterosexual. Straight guys have it tough! In order to be seen as “real men,” they have to always make the first move, ask the girl out, pay for her way, call the girl back after the date—but not too soon! Straight girls have it tough, too: they’re supposed to attract the man’s gaze (as erinannie puts in, “I have done everything except lay down across his desk naked and poured chocolate across me to get his attention”), but—no matter how interested they are in the guy in question, they are supposed to wait for him to ask them out. (Am I missing anything? I was never very good at the straight mating game.)

Things are changing for straights, but homosexual relationships are still so much easier in this regard. Since both people are men or both are women, neither is “the man” and neither is “the woman.” Either can take initiative, either can pay for the date (or they can just split the check), and either can make that after-date call.

This isn’t to put erinannie and her dating practices on the spot. I understand being timid or otherwise reluctant to make the first move. Rejection is a bitch. As I explained in my own comment on erinannie’s post, I would never have had a boyfriend and would be dateless now if it depended on my taking the initiative, because that’s my personality. What I don’t understand is buying into the whole American patriarchal culture of dating and courtship.

So, straight people! Speak up. Why do you or don’t you follow the patriarchal norm in dating and relationships? Guys, do you mind if a girl asks you out, pays for a date, calls you first, etc.? Girls, do you mind doing the asking, paying, calling? Why or why not? What would you say the actual norm is these days, and what negative consequences are there for breaking it?

Non-straight people! What are your relationships like? Egalitarian? Patriarchal? Dom/sub? Butch/femme? Poly? What dating rules do you feel you must follow? People are dying to know!