Art is your way to 'express' yourself. I get that as well. Guess what, when you treat art as a venue to "equalize" things then I get annoyed. You tend to treat it like an orgasm which ends up everywhere - you're enjoying yourself. I can't stop you from enjoying yourself, I don't want to. But still. I mean, that shit got on my shirt. But look at this scenario for a moment:
"Hey, if you got a problem with me - like with my sexuality - then it's your problem!"
"Um, okay. Just to play the 'asshole' card, what if you said you got a problem with my religion, beliefs or you want to 'fight' global warming, poverty, racism, sexist etc. etc. and I say 'Well that's just your problem!' since I don't side with global warming types, think poverty will always exist and well as racism and sexism - would that be okay?"
"No, that's different."
I say this after I stumbled upon NYC photographer iO Tillet Wright's "Self-Evident Truths" - an art project consisting of more than 1, 000 portraits of people who aren't "anything other than 100% straight." She will be traveling across the nation in order to find non-straights in various US cities, to help non-straights aware that they are not alone.
As someone who is straight, I'm quite offended by this project's name. It's basically saying "Straight people, don't you feel guilty for building a bigoted, hateful society? There are many non-straight people around you that you unknowingly hate and hurt." To that I say, "Go stick your dick in your partner's anus, suck his dick and hope you don't get AIDS. For the females, you can hold hands together all you want and give each other kisses, and rub your vaginas together but that's where the penis is suppose to be during sex. You both don't have penises. Also a child won't come out of two females rubbing their vagina flaps together."
The only thing that's worth mentioning from that interview is that she doesn't like PC language - that she rejects gender neutral words. At least we have some actually sanity in that department with her. Her goal with is project is to lay down all the faces of her completed "Self-Evident Truths" at the National Mall of the Washington Monument in order to humanize homosexuals and bisexuals. I'll admit, this obsession (they'll call it passion) to humanize non-straights is plain out annoying. If non-straights are being beaten, persecuted, shunned and fired for their sexuality in droves then I'd probably treat Wright's project with more respect. But they aren't.
This project also has an insidious byproduct. It is to help re-socialize the population in not assuming that every woman a man has affection for is straight and vice versa. Instead of the "consent" card played during deviant sex and foreplay, it's the "can't assume" card when trying to ask the opposite sex for date. So guys, if you see that cute girl drinking at the bar alone don't assume she likes guys. You have to ask if she likes guys.
(If you take time to see several interviews from StyleLikeU, many of the people interviewed seem to have baggage. Not the average baggage that comes from an emotional stable person, but baggage that can only be soothed and be turned into self-righteousness in the arts & entertainment circles of NYC and LA. This is one of the many reasons why I think modern day liberal are the most fragile demographic compared to the vulnerable elderly, children and mentally/physically handicapped.)
Ms Wright's other project, a branch of "Self-Evident Truths", is "We Are You" -
No shit, Sherlock.
Her whole message is to treat others with respect, dignity and empathy (remember, this is Kris Kluwe's favorite word). I get that. Empathy is achieved through familiarity. Fair enough. Sounds like a reasonable and noble goal, right? Good intentions pave the road to hell (in my mind this is mediocrity, barely any standards and the loss of romance & distinctions); though Ms. Wright's goal is to humanize the non-straights, which sounds deeply compassionate and no doubt it successfully conjures feelings of "empowerment" to the SJW types, it just comes across, to me, as narcissistic. And annoying as heck.
As Ms. Wright writes, when Yosi Sergant, creator of Obama's "Hope" poster, asked her to be part of Manifest Equality, which I will presume the name was inspired by Manifest Destiny (bold & italics are my own emphasis),
My participation had nothing to do with the fact that I am bisexual, in a committed relationship and living with a woman. It was because the fact that equality is still something that has to be fought for in this country is an embarrassing travesty that our children will have to explain to our grandchildren. They'll say it was a dark mistake made by a grip of conservative septuagenarians with too much influence on our national body politic. Along with racial equality and the late bloom of women's rights, future generations will have to explain how, in the past, gays were misunderstood, and publicly humiliated for loving each other, and eventually, how they stood together and conquered stupidity and hypocritical hatred, and fought their way out of marginalization. They will show them pictures of ecstatic, sweet couples on the steps of city halls across the country, and of artwork made by people who wanted to give the movement a face.I had to look up the word "septuagenarians." Wright was referring to old, wrinkly, racist, bigoted white guys who were boinking their secretaries as their wife made them sandwiches as they arrived from work. Go figure.
Anyways, I'm in no way "embarrassed" by the this so-called travesty. It's horrid that slavery happened here. If you caught me in my college years, when I proclaimed I was "very, very liberal" in a class speech, I'd probably be embarrassed with the 1960s Civil Rights Era and nod in much agreement with Wright. Now, I've matured (somewhat) and my politics have changed. I do not see the Civil Rights Era or the appeal to woman's suffrage as a national embarrassment. Given the history of the nation, embarrassment is probably the last thing on my 'feels' plate. Should there be strong feelings towards the supposed johnny-come-lately for desegregation of whites & blacks? Maybe. Wright fails to acknowledge the unique history of race in America which played into slavery and the general view on race up until the 1960s. Racial inequality is also a loaded concept so she's most definitely just practicing "1950s was just yesterday, man," mentality. Women in the US gained national suffrage in 1920. Given how young the country was compared to other established nations this isn't something to be embarrassed about. It happened in 1920, end of story. Wishing it be earlier is plain ridiculousness. Roe vs. Wade came into effect in 1973 - compared to other countries, to describe it as a "late bloom" is showing the lack of historical perspective. I guess they don't teach (accurate) history on Wright's art projects, after all she doesn't work a 9-5 and it employed by freelance so ... Tons of freakin' free time.
My kids will only be "embarrassed" if they are taught by people like Wright, if they see people like Wright as some sort of "unicorn" bravely galloping against the status quo. To compare gay "rights" to the Civil Rights Era and woman's suffrage and access to abortion is just plain vapid and desperate. If I were a black woman I'd want to slap Wright on the side of the head.
Whoa! Violence, you bigot and homophobe!
My comments on the statements in italics: I wonder where are these stories of people who have same-sex attraction, acting upon it in public, and are humiliated by the public. (If Wright thinks not supporting same-sex 'marriage' and relationships counts humiliation then we are dealing with a piece of glass.) Where are all these stories Wright? I am not denying that homosexuals have been marginalized; I'm skeptical of this "gay is new black." Where are these lynching? These job firings if not rejection? Where are these leases being axed because the tenant is not straight? Where are these entertainment articles saying "Homo sighting in The Grove in LA!" Io Wright is a few years older than I am, and I consider myself up-to-date on the supposed "hate" crimes against homosexuals, so I'm very curious what prompts her to say this. The feels, maybe. She also admits that it's equally about gaining social acceptance as it is revenge on people - those old, wrinkly conservatives - by shoving pictures of their governmental sanctioned 'wedding.' All happy. All smiling. Good As You, right?
I'll say something quite arrogant, if I haven't already been arrogant before in this post: But it does, Ms. Wright. This is in response to Wright's "had nothing to do with the fact that I am bisexual." It does.You are involved, partly, because you are not "100% straight." You do not like the fact that your sexuality is on the fringes of sexuality. A good majority of the people in the USA are straight - your "anything other than 100% straight" pretty much says "I'm quite upset that straight culture dominates this (US) society."
I am not a "queer artist" -- that is to say, I don't have an identity built around my sexuality, as it pertains to my artwork, which is part of what I found so exciting about the Manifest Equality show. The show was organized by three brilliant straight people, and both the art on the walls, and the crowd on the gallery floor were a totally mixed bag; straight actors who play gay characters on television, straight movie stars who have gay family, and gay superstar activists mingled with kids like me and my sexually ambiguous friends, to look at work made by more straight artists than gay. It wasn't about being homosexual, it was about being human, and the rights that that qualification should afford everyone.
This is pathetic beyond belief.
I'm going to be more mean than I am already. This woman seriously thinks she's the new black. As you said inthe StyleLikeU interview, when describing how she looked like a boy as a kid and not being straight, "I don't fit any box ... I'm like a unicorn!" If a unicorn ever existed its own species - being studied for any particular eating, mating and sleeping patterns. This is one dumb bitch. With that paragraph she just leveled-up to whole new plain of nonsense.
It hit me, on opening night, that I was in LA. Where else would I see Darryl Hannah gazing at my photo, and Erin Daniels (of The L Word) grabbing portraits from my piles?Yes, you're human. You also have a vagina so you identifying as a boy undermines your entire 'feels.' Such people are admiring your work regardless of your sexuality.
You were brought in by Sergant mainly because of your sexuality. I have no evidence to back this up, but what are the chances of Sergant picking Wright who so happens to be a walking parody of a modern day social activist with her type of mental fucked up logic concerning sexuality? As there are many celebrities that make people go star-struck in LA, photographers like Wright are a dime a dozen in the arts & entertainment circle in places like LA and NYC. The irony.
If there is one thing that non-straights (especially when it comes to 'artsy' non-straights) do that irritates the heck out of me, and further makes me think they truly suffer from some sort of inferiority complex (mainly due to their sexuality - they'll say it's due to society, but it's really due to their sexuality and becoming aware that they are a minority), is their need to constantly remind the world - not just their family and close friends - that they aren't straight. It's weird. Writer J.K. Rowling said "Gay people just look like people." True. And through "Self-Evident Truths" Wright builds upon this, but it's end goal, besides its surface goal, is to normalize non-straight behavior and get government's OKAY on same-sex 'marriage.' It's a middle finger to the old conservatives. It's to paint the people in the portraits as victims of hatred, and the country as a johnny-come-lately in terms of human 'equality.' This sounds like a waiter being chastised for not bringing the food on time -- because table five ordered after table one yet table five has theirs already.
This is a deeply bitter and insecure woman, all wrapped under her "the artist/activist" cloak (see: personal site).
Also, when someone, say an actress, needs a magazine or any form of art medium (or even a drunken speech - see: Jodie Foster), to "come out" that means that dealing with being comfortable with ones sexuality is more of a psychological problem than any actual bigoted societal norm. It's especially telling if that someone grew up in a city, like NYC, went to university to study acting, has friends that are artsy and most likely socially liberal, and who works in an industry that's pro-non-straight like the movie industry (entertainers will say that the movie industry is homophobic, which is a story for another day). If they still feel the need to say "I just want to be happy," due to them feeling marginalized by society for not being "anything other than 100% straight" then that calls for investigation of that person's psyche. Like I said, whatever insecurities and hurt the LGBT community is feeling it's mostly due to some perceived injustice. Then again actors are probably the most insecure people once you get personal, all the while projecting an ego that's much bigger than their own height. I will deduce that such people will never be as comfortable in their sexuality as straights are.
No comments :
Post a Comment