Link to article: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/13/sarah-mcbride-gay-survivors-helped-launch-me-too-but-rates-lgbt-abuse-largely-overlooked/692094002/
Sexual assault is a form of violence that disproportionately affects women and minority groups. This can be seen from the rates of sexual assault on LGBTQ people. It’s no shock to me that simply coming out increases one’s risk for sexual assault. The article lists and explains the risk factors LGBTQ people experience including greater risk of alcohol and drug use, homelessness, poverty and lack of employment opportunities. It also explains the role myths about LGBTQ people play in the disproportionate rates of violence.
I found this article interesting because we give the #MeToo movement so much credit for allowing victims to share their stories and find support. However, the stories that get the most attention are those of prominent straight white women and a powerful male assaulter. I think the #MeToo movement is shifting in the right direction, but are we doing enough to allow everyone’s story to be heard?
Why is it that despite the staggering statistics on the rates of sexual assaults on minority groups the stories that get the most attention are those of primarily straight white female celebrities?
This video was released on May 15th, for the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia. The video begins with audio of several reports of anti-LGBTQ violence from around the world. It serves as a reminder that in various parts of the world LGBTQ people are still the targets of prejudice and violence. The Pride Shield was created to show that if we stand together we can end the violence. It consists of 193 pride flags, one for every country in the world.
I believe the Pride Shield is an interesting concept and effectively symbolizes a solution to ending the violence. Imagine if all 193 countries took a stand against anti-LGBTQ violence, as the flags symbolically do in the video.
Do you believe the Pride Shield could ever be implemented? What cultural obstacles would we face if we tried to unite all 193 countries against anti-LGBTQ violence?
“Marriage Act can SUCK IT!!” read the text message I received from a very dear friend of mine. My question mark response was followed by a reference to NPR’s All Things Considered with Michele Norris and Robert Siegel. I quickly shared my friend’s excitement when I read that Obama had declared the defense of Marriage Act Unconstitutional. Not to sound pessimistic, but for every step forward, we often witness several setbacks. I’m curious to see what will be done by the republican majority in the House.
I found a pretty cool article about Protestant congregations and homosexuality that I thought I’d share with you guys: Cage and Wildman (2008). “Facilitators and Advocates: How Mainline Protestant Clergy Respond to Homosexuality.” Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 587-603.
Cage and Wildman collected the perspectives of some “mainline Protestant” ministers (as well as some members of their congregations), which helped to shed some light on some pervading feelings of homo-anxiety among the Protestant camp. For the most part, any fear of homosexuals seemed to come from either widespread (false) generalizations, or from a fear of the change that could potentially be brought about through the implications of homosexual acceptance.
For example, one minister reported that the general sentiment circulating through his church community was that homosexuals were more “predatory” than heterosexuals. As he explained, the notion of homosexuality and child molestation were very thinly separated concepts in the minds of his congregants.
These respondents also suggested that homosexuality in some way might initiate a change in historical practice and/or institutions, and as such, caused an exceeding level of anxiety. For example, one minister noted that if homosexuality is something that will become considered natural and approved of by God, several millennia of theological teaching would be undermined, and such a thing is simply a “big deal” (p. 594).
So, for the most part, it would appear that a lot of the anxiety surrounding homosexuality in churches (at least, if we are to generalize from this article) stems from a lack of experience with the gay community, and/or from the shifting paradigm that its acceptance might incite. While the former might be “cured” through educating the church community, the latter poses a more interesting problem for LGBT acceptance; I imagine change will be slow if half of the present fear surrounds the notion of change itself.