LGBT Thread

Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum

Help Support Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
bulmabriefs144 said:
Industries change because people pave the way for change.

This website demonstrates the point, many of these fields were closed to trans-folk until some of them entered.

For example, NASCAR racing is about the most homophobic male-centered thing you can think of. Terri O'Connell is apparently a transgender racer there. Why did she not get phased out? She's good.

Generally, heavy industry insists people prove their worth. Be good enough at your job that he can't dispute your right to work there.


^While I agree with you, it's not that the industry is really closed to anyone. I mean obviously they can't legally discriminate like that. It's just that how the politics and general attitude of coworkers plays out, it would be an incredibly difficult road to walk down. I suppose it probably depends a lot on who you work for also.

The last company I worked for really liked to play cowboy with labor laws. They would fire people on a whim, and often those who quit and offered their 2 weeks notice were sent home immediately. There were a number of court cases pertaining to illegitimate firings and union corruption. While legally they don't have the right, the potential still exists for a person's life to be made miserable through harassment and unfair treatment.
 
(Missing the point there)

Then keep a low profile, tell if anyone asks, but reassure them that foremost "I'm here to work." What I'm saying is not to push gay agenda. Earn the right to work there. Industries change because the people in them prove themselves as good workers, not because of lobbies. Not in the long run.

The over-the-top guy he's picking on is likely to be harassed anyway, because he's striking them as obnoxious. Keep the attitude that this is this, and that is that, and keep work and your sex life very separate from each other.

That is, if you are doing decent work, they are in the wrong. If you are spending more time acting kinda gay than working, they can make a case that the problem is you, and you can show no evidence otherwise. In the other case, you can show them completed projects, and how bigotry on their part is screwing with this.

Clear the air. Let him know that you as well are like this, but you hope this won't lead to automatic termination on your part based on what you've seen of the other guy. Assure them that you continue to work hard, regardless.

He can do one of three things. Fire you on the spot, in which case, you can gather proof of work prejudice and sue. Work you much harder, trying to get rid of you. Or he can accept you. In the third case, you're clear, and you've settled something that would bother you if you tried to hide it (not to mention trying to hide it would build ground for work dishonesty). In the middle case, you have the opportunity to prove yourself as a worker, and once he tries and fails to make you quit you'll have earned his respect.

Do your job, and do it well. Nobody can fault you that.
 
What, exactly, is "acting gay," and why can't one "act gay" and work at the same time?
Mannerisms? Gestures? Effeminate behavior?

These are things that people pick up throughout their entire lives. They do not "act gay," they ARE gay. This isn't a shot at you, personally, but being gay is not like crossdressing. The mannerisms don't go away once the wig comes off. Behaving effeminately, or more masculine, or feminine, or whatever it is every man or woman feels more comfortable doing, is just something that feels more natural to that individual.

And it does not mean that the individual does not work hard, if not harder than many of their straight coworkers.

In Bob's example, I fail to see how you believe the guy was "over-the-top." Bob said he was

... kind of an effeminate guy. Mainly he just had a high pitched voice and talked with a lisp.

This was the apprentice's fatal flaw, yet, this...

He was generally very bossy and arrogant towards any apprentices at a lower level than him (myself included), and even towards people higher up the food chain whom he happened to disagree with.

Was not?

For all the journeyman knew, the guy could've been straight. He just happened to have effeminate tendencies. How can he be faulted for that? Is that to say, even straight people can't behave in a way that deviates from the women-are-wimps, men-are-brutes standard that we have set for ourselves because they might come off as gay?

That's preposterous.

It comes down to plain, unadulterated homophobia - and that's what's sick. True bigots will not change their minds even if you work your fingers to the bloody, raw bone. As far as they're concerned, you owe them that for being such a disgrace in their presence.

While I agree that documentation of one's hard work always makes a better case in court during these disputes of unlawful termination of the work contract, it does not mean one has to behave any way other than what is more comfortable for his or herself. It's 2012, god **** it, not 1950.
 
Well it's not even so much a matter of getting fired as being socially ostracized. I think that would actually be the worst part, because there's a huge social aspect to the trades. All your work is generally done in teams. You work on close-knit crews that end up being like little cliques. Most people eat lunch in one large communal area. In a lot of ways it's like high school but with grownups. It's not that I'm saying an openly gay man wouldn't be able to overcome these hurdles through hard work and perseverance, it's just sad to see that these hurdles are still so prevalent in this day and age.
 
(Still missing the point)

What exactly is "acting gay" anyway?

This is a good model.

In "Dancing With The Stars" Bruno the judge, is always over-the-top histrionic. He's probably straight in real life, but comes across as noticeably gay.

Who's actually gay? Just this guy, and he comes across as the straightest of them.

Most businesses, even extremely closed-minded ones have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Liberals act like it's backwards, but if someone has already proved themselves to be a competent worker, you can't really dismiss them just because of that anymore. And if someone tries to probe your sexuality, it's probably a good reason to leave anyway. The guy you talked about before...

He was generally very bossy and arrogant towards any apprentices at a lower level than him (myself included), and even towards people higher up the food chain whom he happened to disagree with. His fatal flaw, however, (in the eyes of the j-man I was paired up with) was the fact that he was kind of an effeminate guy. Mainly he just had a high pitched voice and talked with a lisp.

In other words, he was insubordinate, he was distracting, and he was not keeping his sex life his business. At least, this is how it seems to an employer. And no, I am not saying the "men must be butch, women must be soft" rule should hold. There are men in daycare, there are women in heavy factory jobs. But realize this, despite the social climate in many jobs (I tend to avoid alot of better paying jobs because of the heavy social), these people are not your friends. Outside the context of work, maybe you can decide whether or not. But in the mean time, a person who is not guarded risks having embarrassing secrets on display, and assumptions being made.

I had a boss that kept bullying me to lift weights. My frame is naturally thin, I'm a crossdresser. I however, said nothing. It's his hangup, unless he bullies me to the point where I snap at him, in which case, it's likely time to go, anyway.

I had another boss who may have been gay, who I did carpet cleaning for him. He was very bossy, and a pain to work for. But I never once accused him of being gay, or mentioned the fact that at age 50 he was still living with his mom. It was a side-detail, not relevant to the job. The job was stressful, and I hated it, but a person should always keep these two separate. You should not be fired because you are gay, you should not be fired because you are effeminate, you should be fired because you act gay, or straight, or whatever. Religion, politics, and sex should never be brought up, unless it affects the job ("can you come Saturday?" "No, I have Sabbath/sorry I'm voting/nope I'm getting breast implants") and if then, only if brought up, never because you just have to talk about it.

So no, you should not be doing both. But all things being equal, you should be waiting until after company time to be hitting on people of the opposite sex as well. There's a ton of straight guys acting like serial rapists, who should definitely be disciplined. Keep the private life private, and keep your personal time personal (i.e. a boss that doesn't respect that you do have time you want to be doing religious, social, sexual things and always insists you put them aside is not great, likewise you should not be wasting his personal time having deep personal discussions on what you want in a women/man/pet/plant/etc).

Being yourself is a luxury, not a necessity. If you find yourself working at a nice cushy job where everyone's nice to everyone, sure. But it sounds like you're not. So suck it up, work hard, and get promoted as much as possible. Then you can change company policy.

Or you can leave. I often have, especially if I give an honest answer why I can't work, and the boss doesn't trust it as other than an excuse. I had one job where the boss let this woman off on the day I was working, and gave my job on my best paying day away to someone because I wouldn't work on a third day because of another job (which he scoffed at). Ummm, can you say double standard? For five hours of peeling and cleaning veggies, and loading boxes, I get roughly $40. Or I get $30 for relatively easy work, where I'm essentially my own boss. Just for the heck of it, I told him I was gonna take a two week vacation (two day really, because he'd cut my hours so much). I haven't worked for a major company since.
 
I'd like to point out that this is a networking thread, not a debate thread. However, I'd like to address some of the things you've said, Bulma.

First I understand you're basically talking about invisibility as a survival strategy, i.e. act as straight as possible if you can't handle being out. Which is obviously perfectly acceptable. But I have some problems with what you're saying.

You seem to have the idea that Bob's co-worker is hitting on people left, right and centre. He didn't say that anywhere, only that he was a bit arrogant and had effeminate mannerisms and a lisp. YOU have made the assumption that because he was acting effeminate he must have been hitting on co-workers all the time and not keeping his sex life and work life separate. I don't know how you got "not keeping his sex life his business" from "mainly he just had a high pitched voice and talked with a lisp." How did you go from 'a bit effeminate' to 'must be gay' to 'must be hitting on guys all the time at his work place and rubbing his gayness in everyone's faces'?

You also say, "If you're spending more time acting kinda gay than working," which - do you understand that this isn't even a thing? Who in their right MIND goes to work to "act kinda gay"? Along with you saying, "The over-the-top guy he's picking on is likely to be harassed anyway, because he's striking them as obnoxious." What made you describe him as over-the-top? Why is this being framed as this guy's fault for making them feel like he's being obnoxious, rather than THEIR fault for being bigoted ********?

You also seem to be assuming that Bob is asking for advice. He's not, he's complaining about something he hates in his industry. And you're saying he's missing the point - he wasn't, he was acknowledging that people can be successful in their fields but it must be really difficult for them. How is that missing the point? He's trying to talk about what it must be like as an LGBT person in his industry and you're trying to give him advice that he hasn't asked for.

You're quite right in saying that people pave the way for change, but if you only talk about that and not about the fact that industries can and do make it really hard for people they don't like to succeed, you are going to sound as if you're saying, "If LGBT people aren't successful it means they haven't worked hard enough." Like that page you linked, it shows LGBT successes. It doesn't mention any of the trans women who've been bullied out of their jobs, been unable to get work because of problems with work history or discrimination, or had promising careers but were murdered before they could realize their potential.

You've said that industries don't change because of lobbies, but by people working hard, which is really misinformed. If every LGBT person just kept their head down and worked hard, guess what? NOTHING WOULD HAVE CHANGED because that's what maintains the status quo. And the people in charge would doubtless find reasons to harass/fire them/not hire in the first place because of it. Bigotry needs to be called out and shut down or nothing will change.

When you said, "I never once accused him of being gay, or mentioned the fact that at age 50 he was still living with his mom," you're saying that you didn't ask intrusive questions about his personal life even though you didn't like him. That's, like, the bare minimum standard of human decency and it bothers me that you seem to be making an equivalency between spitefully asking uncomfortable questions of your co-workers and making your bigoted co-workers uncomfortable by being kinda of effeminate.

And you said, "You should be fired because you act gay, or straight, or whatever." By 'acting gay,' you must mean making obvious advances on co-workers, because that's the only way you can tell someone is gay. But again, why did you assume this is what's happening?

Like, I get the whole 'don't push the gay agenda' thing, I just think you're making some really problematic assumptions, ignoring that discrimination is a huge factor in low LGBT visibility in most professions, undervaluing how much activism has accomplished, and insinuating that it's LGBT folks' fault for not being successful because they haven't worked hard enough.
 
Bulma, I think you're missing my point as well. I fail to see how "high pitched voice and talked with a lisp" translates to the apprentice's sex life. For example, in my life I've known people with all sorts of mental handicaps - some, like my uncle who has downs syndrome, were very noticeable; some, like a coworker at my mother's job, you couldn't even tell was actually suffering from slight retardation. In the coworker's case, the only trait indicative of his mental health was the fact that he spoke with a high pitched voice and talked with a lisp except for when he got angry - then his voice deepened to a baritone level.

There, not gay at all, but to anyone with the same mindset as Bob's journeyman, he would've been marked as a huge, flaming queer. He would've been marked by you as "acting gay," had I not told you just now that he was retarded. And all his coworkers, not having known that this man's brain was simply wired differently, teased him relentlessly, calling him a fag, asking if his boyfriend was going to pick him up, starting fights and then getting him in trouble. Eventually, one day, the guy went nuts with rage and beat the living honeysuckle out of the last coworker that tried to pick on him.

So, there are a few things I'd like to make from this example. Firstly, no you should not be fired for acting effeminately. Which, basically, is what it sounds like you mean by saying "acting gay," because really, there is no way to "act gay" in a workplace except to either flirt with your male coworkers (which no one did in either of these examples) or to bring your boyfriend to work and fresia him on your boss' desk. And, on that note, I'd like to point out that you're seeing things that are not there.

So no, you should not be doing both. But all things being equal, you should be waiting until after company time to be hitting on people of the opposite sex as well. There's a ton of straight guys acting like serial rapists, who should definitely be disciplined.

No one even alluded to anything of the sort. No one even mentioned sex. We are talking about people who are ostracized just for appearing a way that deviates from their gender role, gay or not. If anyone were to hit on anyone during work hours, gay or straight, then that person should be penalized for it. Bar none.

Second, it only proves that there is no way to tell if someone is gay based on their outward appearance and manner of speech. So, there is no such thing as acting gay. At best, you could get away with calling it "acting like the opposite gender," and, coworkers' humiliation and ridicule aside, that is no basis for a contract termination - again, it's not 1950.

Third, you're not understanding that these folks behave in manners that are literally second nature to them. There is no on or off switch. I can personally attest to the judgment being passed on these people as I have been called a butch, dyke, and lesbian - all things I do not identify myself as - merely for the fact that I speak bluntly and sometimes in a deeper tone than your "average American woman" model. People in the workplace are suspected of (and then given hell for) being gay for much, much less.

It is just inexcusable and cannot be in any way justified. However, you are perpetuating the "gay people act feminine" stereotype by actually believing and spreading that one can spot a person that "acts gay". Your example using Mark Ballas only proves my point - there is no such thing as acting gay!

And, before I get back to your post, I'd like to point out that perhaps you mean behaving flamboyantly. In which case, again, not necessarily gay, even if intolerant people can't stomach it.

Now, back to your post...

Being yourself is a luxury, not a necessity. If you find yourself working at a nice cushy job where everyone's nice to everyone, sure. But it sounds like you're not.

Not only is it a necessity, it's a god-given right clad in an iron suit I like to call the Bill of Rights. Perhaps you don't understand the mental damage it can do a person to suppress their natural behavior. I don't mean standing at the water cooler trying not to check out all the same-sex coworkers. I mean standing in front of a mirror every day practicing speaking in a lower or higher pitched voice, speaking without a lisp, keeping a masculine (or more feminine, for women) posture or facial expression, taking all kinds of extra steps to smudge out the traits that make you an individual and suppress the habits that came to you naturally. No company policy can override our right to just be.

Just to clarify, here, are you understanding that even the smallest of innocent gestures, even an inflection in one's voice, can make a person think you're gay?

Moving on, I'd also like to point out that none of your examples are exactly good arguments in this matter. We're not talking about a boss harrassing a skinny dude to lift weights. We're not talking about the favoritism a male boss has for female employees over male employees that has only been present since the dawn of penises everywhere. In neither of those situations is someone telling you to suppress your natural, core being because IT DISGUSTS HIM. This is not a matter of just dealing with a shitty boss or coworker - it's a matter of losing one's total identity because of the bigotry that goes on in these industries. Yes, it's that big. And not everyone can just up and quit their job, you know. They have themselves and often even families to take care of and companies don't hand out jobs like candy - especially in industries that are known for their homophobic tendencies.


ajdass1 said:
I'd like to point out that this is a networking thread, not a debate thread.

Absolutely right. What's say you and I go hang out by the water cooler? (hello)
 
ajdass1 said:
I'd like to point out that this is a networking thread, not a debate thread.

You're right AJ, I suppose I probably should have made a separate thread to bring up this issue. I apologize for distracting from the real purpose of this thread. I hope you and Rabbit have a good time at that water cooler ;).
 
Still missing the point. God.

"Acting gay" is not effeminate behavior. It's histrionic behavior. But this is besides the point, because nobody gets what I'm saying.

The reason you're missing the point is that work is about work. Nothing more or less than this. Whatever you do besides this (sexual harassment, excessive gossip, viewing porn, sleeping, etc) when you should be working is not working, and can be grounds for termination. At the very least, this guy is arguing with his superiors and generally being obnoxious.

Of course, this does not excuse that boss. But you should take stock of this and decide whether or not you want to continue working. If you think you'll be okay because you're a good worker, you'll probably be okay, and just ignore it. If you think he might do the same to you, then you should likely look for similar companies where your skills could be put to work without the hassle of someone making judgements on you too.

And yea, let's stop debating on this. Back to the last topic... what was it again?
 
Oy I am an ally and I am working on making a transgender pamphlet for my school. I am just flat out citating, and take most of the Department of Healths pamphlet from the UK. I want to know is it right as an ally for me to advocate and push for this, or should I leave it to my friends in Queer alliance? If anyone would like an issue added onto this please tell me. I am working with the Queer alliance in my college, but they are generally not down for the paper work.

http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/documents/digitalasset/dh_097168.pdf
 
That's fine if they don't want to do it. Just make sure you show it to them once you're finished. Heck, post it on here and we'll look at it and see if there are any glaring issues :O
 
ajdass1 said:
That's fine if they don't want to do it. Just make sure you show it to them once you're finished. Heck, post it on here and we'll look at it and see if there are any glaring issues :O

I posted what I largely plan on taking to the committees that may fund this pamphlet. 95% of it already is already made in that link I gave. I will show them the finished product, but I cannot do others work for them. They need to be activists, and advocates as well. An ally is supposed to assist. Here is the link again if you would like to view a majority of my source info.

http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/documents/digitalasset/dh_097168.pdf
 
Blegh, it's all bright and colorful.

When I think of what LBGT deal with, I think of very dark serious issues (Day of Remembrance comes to mind)

Also, the font is kinda huge. I think a better approach would be one that is more like on of the manuals at the border missions near Mexico, where it impresses upon people the whole "thousands are killed each day" and that people deserve to be able to live their lives as they choose, not get offed for being different.

Or am I misunderstanding the point of the pamphlet? Is it to get people to join who are already LBGT? Or to get people who were previously homophobic to change their minds and lend support?
 
Hi boys

Looks like this thread just kinda stopped. Would love to hear from you. Who's still in the closet, do you plan on coming out soon?
 
Minty is, I keep telling him to come out but he has second thoughts about it all the time.
 
Much of my family actually knows/found out, but I'm still living as though I'm in the closet.

I'd be uncomfortable shopping with family, for instance, or talking about it in length (well I did so with my brother, but not so much with my parents).

I have a few people I'd love to tell that I haven't.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top