When I was younger a lot of people assumed I was gay. My own parents assumed I was gay. I didn’t “lisp” but I ticked a lot of other stereotypical boxes: didn’t like cars or sports, liking cooking (and was the only boy in my Home Ec class), knew way too much about musicals, had a very catty sense of humor and went long periods without having a girlfriend. I mean, it never bothered me that people thought so - hell, I’d have assumed I was gay, meeting me - but I’m not. Deeply shy and socially awkward to the point of being weird, sure, but not gay. So stereotypes will only get you so far.
[/PA]
That said, I don’t think there’s any intrinsic harm in saying “Celebrity X pings my gaydar” based on superficial clues as long as 1) you’re not using it to slander them, and 2) it’s not a hill you’re planning on dying on.
I don’t care at all what your thoughts are regarding people you meet – but if you put out there in the world a judgment based entirely on stereotypes, then you may get criticized for it.
This isn’t really what I said. I’m just not going to tell gay people how to talk about gay people, full stop. That doesn’t mean gay people can’t say bad things, but I just don’t feel qualified to tell a gay person that they’re talking incorrectly about gay people, barring some very unusual circumstances.
Humans, after all, are pattern seeking creatures and are notoriously good at coming to the wrong conclusions about all sorts of things. That said, there is ample evidence that humans are generally very good at some pattern recognition, i.e.:recognizing social cues.
Now, I don’t know anything about Tupac or his sexual predilections. Don’t much care to be honest. But Ambivalid seems to have come to the conclusion, based on limited evidence to be sure, that Tupac may be a gay man. The indicators he used to come to that conclusion may well be part of a negative stereotypical profile, but can you say for certain it was “entirely” based on stereotypes? Based on what do you draw that conclusion? What role does intuition play in these situations? Is intuition a stereotype trap?
Should we censor all our thoughts and judgments for fear of being criticized?
He said it was 100% based on mannerisms, body language, etc. Not a big deal to think “hey, I think that guy’s gay”. If you base it 100% on mannerisms, body language, etc., and you say it publicly to me, then I’ll probably say “I think you’re basing your judgment on stereotypes, and I think generally that’s a bad thing that should be avoided, even if you don’t mean any harm”.
I think we’re in agreement here but I hope I don’t put too fine a point on the following:
Often, social & physical cues are all we have to go on. These are not cues exclusive to gay men. Straight people have their own cues that signal availability, interest, disinterest, preference and inclination as well.
Is it a stereotyping profile to recognize those cues if you’re straight?
“Harm” is precisely the type of intent/motive that should be publicly criticized when identified as such. Benign observations of, ‘He/she might be gay based on my intuition’, ought not, IMO.
To just think about them? I don’t think so. To make a final judgment with any sort of confidence? I think that’s unwise and worth criticizing.
Right, but discussing things publicly about the sexuality of others who either haven’t come out or otherwise given their consent for such intimate details to be discussed can potentially cause harm. I don’t know if Ambivalid actually harmed anyone even in a teeny-tiny way, but I think such discussions have the potential to harm in ways that probably don’t jump readily to mind, and thus I think it’s probably best to avoid them barring a celebrity deciding to “come out” or similar circumstances.
Again, not a huge deal. These kind of discussions are fine, even if some of the things said are worth criticizing.
That’s my issue too. It’s fine to make assumptions about people, not only fine but human beings literally can’t not make assumptions about people. It’s part of being a sentient creature. Your brain takes in information and analyzes it. It’s impossible to turn it off. The way you analyze information is based on your experience and education, and instinct to an extent. Criticizing a person for this is like criticizing them for breathing.
What’s not good though is drawing conclusions based on superficial analysis.
“I wonder if that guy with a lisp is gay because I knew two guys with a lisp and they were gay.” That’s reasonable.
“That guy has a lisp so he has to be gay.” That isn’t.
We can’t control what we notice and how we think about what we notice. But we can control how we draw conclusions about what we think and how we act/what we say based on them.
Food preference is not an inherently negative generalization but if a restaurant cook upon being given an order of fried chicken with a side of water melon concluded that the patron must be black, I would question that cook’s views on race.
I draw a conclusion (if one is needed for some sort of decision or is simply of interest to me) based on the available information. When that information changes, I re-examine my conclusion. I imagine that’s not so unusual. But it’s a little surprising to me how many folks here conclude that others have a different, much less flexible, decision making processes.
For example, I suspect that Ambivalid would be open to changing his opinion of Tupac if presented with new evidence to the contrary. Not because I know him personally, but based on the history of his previous posts on various subjects. Dude just doesn’t strike me as a jackass. Perhaps he’ll return to provide evidence to the contrary.
Just want to point out that those who insist that everyone ought to avoid jumping to definitive conclusions are being slightly presumptive in that others are not as open minded as they under similar circumstances.
