This picture came across my feed and I was surprised by its poignancy. I knew it was a cutting way to make his point but I agreed with it and thought it was a point worth making.
Guess who was offended by this post.
Allies with homophobic or transphobic partners.
Here are some comments that were made:
“I’m gay and proud, yet this is divisive, uncompromising, unable to see the other side, self absorbed and very close minded. This sentence is devoid of compassion, insight on complexity of relationships (romantic and otherwise).”
“Why do you want to exclude people who are clearly on your side? This is not a religious take, but I grew up in the Catholic church and I‘ve always hated how excluding it was: We are all the same BUT it‘s not ok to be gay or divorced, as a woman you can‘t be a priest. Why don‘t we appreciate people who share the same common ground? Why are we not more INcluding (as a society)? Isn‘t that what we want THEM to be?”
“I can't change my partner's mind. He may change eventually, as I did, but I can't change his mind for him. And in the meantime, am I supposed to just get divorced because we disagree?”
“This is very black&white, all-or-nothing type thinking. Human relationships are too intricate and nuanced for this sort of blanket claim.”
“Are you suggesting that people are incapable of loving someone with differing viewpoints from themselves?! Feels wrong.”
It seems like there is a gap in understanding that these comments don’t recognize and I wanted to address that here. Let me first acknowledge as a queer person that it is tiresome to continuously have to educate privileged, straight people who have a heated attitude about something they don’t understand.
Here are 8 takeaways I’d like for you to get from this exchange:
The man who made the post is gay. He is a sexual minority expressing his opinion on what is safe and unsafe for queer people. Who is qualified to determine what is safe for queer people? The correct answer is queer people. Unfortunately, I see many allies miss aspects of the queer experience in their advocacy. For a straight person to tell this gay man that he’s wrong about what allyship is blows my mind.
The man who made this post is not saying that people with homophobic or transphobic partners can’t or don’t love the LGBTQ+ community. What he IS saying is that people in those circumstances are not allies. People in those circumstances are taking offense at what he’s saying because it’s an area of pain and insecurity in their own lives.
I don’t want to downplay the difficulty of what people with homophobic or transphobic partners have to navigate. But when their difficulty is brought into the conversation around the safety and well-being of queer people, their difficulty doesn’t erase queer people’s need for safety. I’m seeing a lot of allies centering themselves in this conversation, a repeated offense straight people seem to have a difficulty avoiding. What I would like straight people to understand in this conversation is that the content creator is talking about the safety of queer people, not the moral character of straight people.
The “allies” reacting to this post are upset that the title/status of “ally” is being revoked because of their partner’s beliefs. As a queer person, regardless of your relationship with the title “ally,” I would not feel safe in your world if your significant other was homophobic. That notion should not need further defense. Straight people complaining about this sentiment only exposes their own privilege and ignorance.
This man’s post is not an attack on people with homophobic or transphobic partners, it’s an important distinction between someone who understands our plight and someone who is sympathetic to our plight. He’s not saying they’re not supportive or compassionate, he’s saying they’re not allies. And I agree.
The criticism that this is “black & white thinking” is actually trying to erase the very real and necessary distinction that must be made on behalf of queer people’s lived experiences. I appreciate that “black and white thinking” isn’t helpful in many cases. But if you listen to any queer person expressing the pain and trauma they’ve lived through, we are not negotiating, it’s not a gray area, homophobia and transphobia is welcome nowhere in our proximity. And we are TIRED of straight people telling us how we’re supposed to manage our trauma.
If you’re married to a homophobic or transphobic person, that person will impact your day-to-day life, important decisions, the direction of your lives and your worldview. That is an incredible influence. Just because you feel like you can manage the irreconcilable difference between their values and my humanity doesn’t mean you can. It certainly doesn’t mean your space is safe for me, your awareness is not equal to my experience. If I’m sitting across the table from the affirming partner knowing their spouse despises my humanity, I am definitely censoring myself. I do not feel safe with them.
Should someone with a homophobic or transphobic partner get a divorce? Maybe. But that’s not the point. Just because the post creates difficulty and tension for the person with the problematic spouse doesn’t mean his point is invalid. Divorce may be one of several solutions but that’s not queer people’s problem or responsibility.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk. If there’s anything here that is unclear or that you would like to challenge, please reply to this email and let me know! Thank you for being part of the Mike Drop.
Happy Monday,
Mike
PS. If you are deep in this process and need clarity and support in your allyship, my coaching/consulting is available. You can apply here.
A phobia is an irrational fear of something, so logical approaches are generally unsuccessful. Education delivered experientially or significant emotional events can open a person's mind to other possibilities, depending on how deeply the phobia is rooted. Illnesses are to be dealt with emphatically, not judgmentally. If an ally has a broken arm, we would not dismiss them as irrelevant.