Returning to the process through which the gay and lesbian students interpreted the intentions of others, they found that, because it was impossible to know another person‘s state of mind, they used whatever information was available about a person to judge his/her intention.
For instance, in a situation in which a professor made a heteronormative assumption in class, Hope found herself to be forgiving of this error because she perceived her professor to be a
―good person.‖
I‘m almost certain she didn‘t mean anything, because I know her to be very
compassionate and... she cares about people, you know? And she cares about justice, and she cares about these things, so I think she just wasn‘t careful with what she said. She probably didn‘t even mean it anyway.
Any sense of positivity or compassion that the gay and lesbian students felt in relation to a given person was used to mediate their perceptions of his/her intent to cause harm. Rory also described how he was forgiving of mistakes people may make when speaking to him as long as he sensed some positivity from them. ―I feel like people‘s intentions are really important because, even if you get a bit of that sense the person is trying to be positive, I still kind of appreciate that and don't see it as being overt.‖ Similar to Rory, Becky also judged a person‘s intent on the basis of
105
how she intuitively felt while interacting with him/her. ―I guess there [are] always some subtle or different feelings about people. You can kind of tell maybe they‘re not so okay with it, but they‘re not outwardly negative towards you.‖ The participants‘ felt sense of a given person played an integral role in their judgement of his/her intentions.
The participants also identified elements of their interactions with heterosexuals, such as their body language or tone of voice, which suggested that their behaviour may be intentionally negative or reflective of an underlying prejudice. Von comments, ―I think if you're speaking to someone...it's the way they interact with you that gives it away more than anything else, in like their inflection, how they're saying it,‖ while Tara states that, ―subtle I find has a lot to do with facial expression...looks are really telling.‖ In addition, several participants noted that it was the way in which two or more heterosexuals interacted with each other in relation to the participant that led them to experience a behaviour as discriminatory. According to Jamie, and Alyssa, respectively, ―sometimes people talking to each other‖ and ―whispers in the hall‖ suggested to them that people were discussing their sexuality in a negative context.
The involvement of a third individual in an interaction occurring between the participant and a heterosexual person could also lead a given behaviour to be experienced as discriminatory.
Kelly described how she perceived a behaviour to be negative after a private (and potentially ambiguous) moment between her and another person suddenly became a public (and, from Kelly‘s perspective, unequivocally negative) moment when another person was invited to be critical of her.
I can decide when it‘s negative when somebody looks at me and then they talk to
somebody else. That gives you the negative feeling, because then it‘s like, okay, so now, all of a sudden, this isn‘t just a moment between me and this other person, right?...It‘s hard when you know that, all of a sudden, then there‘s two people who give you disapproving looks. And then, all of a sudden, there‘s three people who give you
disapproving looks, you know? And then it sort of, like, moves down the line from there.
As Kelly‘s experience demonstrates, the act of including multiple others in displaying disapproval of someone creates a felt sense of negativity. It seemed that moments which occurred between the participant and one other person could be dismissed as potentially meaningless but, when a third person was involved, the meaning behind an act became crystallized.
106 5.2.2 Being Sure That Behaviour is Inappropriate
Another significant aspect of the participants‘ experiences with being the target of blatant and subtle homonegative behaviour was how they responded to these behaviours. Since
homonegative behaviours are acts that occur between two or more people, the participants‘
decisions to respond were often situated within their social lifeworlds and relationships with others. The decision to address homonegative behaviour was complicated and dependent upon a host of factors. Patrick comments that the decision to address homonegative behaviours ―isn't black-and-white‖ and varies depending on ―people and relationships and contexts.‖
In general, the gay and lesbian students perceived behaviours that were intentionally meant to harm them as the easiest to classify as inappropriate, as well as the easiest to respond to, because the person‘s intent to harm the gay and lesbian person was considered to be obvious, and the behaviour itself was often socially agreed upon to be unacceptable. Patrick explains that when language is ―used, as in like...let‘s beat up this gay person, or this faggot, that's obviously...
not acceptable.‖ Similarly, Hope found that when people were blatantly rude toward her or other gay and lesbian persons, there was a general understanding among others who may be present that behaviour of that nature was inappropriate. For instance, she found there was a consensus among her classmates that the behaviour of a fellow student who frequently vocalized his homonegative beliefs was wrong. In the following extract, Hope reflects on her personal response to overhearing such blatantly anti-gay/lesbian comments.
Sometimes the overt one is more shocking because I‘m shocked that people are that brazen. But it also kind of normalizes it in the sense that it makes it feel like lots of people think that person‘s being brazen or obnoxious. And, so, it just seems more understood that their behaviour‘s inappropriate because it‘s more out in the open.
As a result of the certainty associated with blatant homonegative acts, the gay and lesbian students were confident about their own responses toward individuals who perpetrated these behaviours. Typically, participants ended their communication with the person who acted negatively toward them and dismissed the person as someone who is hopelessly prejudiced. For instance, Alyssa describes her general approach to people who are blatantly rude or derogatory towards her.
If it's overt, you know, you can just be, like, ―enjoy the rest of your night.‖ I don't need to sit here and talk it through with you. We can just leave your comfort where it is. You're not going to be the person I'm going to talk to at this dinner party, or at this student conference, kind of thing.
107 5.2.3 Being Unsure: Is It Because I’m Gay?
In contrast, the participants found subtle homonegative behaviour to be more difficult to identify and address because of an element of ambiguity associated with the person‘s behaviour and/or intentions. As a result, the act of interpretation was exponentially more prominent in their experiences with subtle homonegativity. Alyssa explains that: ―Subtle behaviour leaves you more to question, and you don't know how to go.‖ Participants found that they tended to live in a state of ambiguity in their social relationships. Indeed, the word ―ambiguous‖ resonated with Hope, who felt that this word thoroughly captured her experience with her classmates whom she generally felt to be distant for reasons that were unclear to her.
Ambiguity is a really good word to hone in on, because I didn‘t know that was my experience, but that‘s my experience...I always I kind of felt like I didn‘t always have a clique... I could never tell if that‘s because I‘m the lone lesbian and I feel awkward about that,... or is it just because they‘re twenty three, and I‘m thirty four...I couldn‘t tell is it just, like, I see myself different or is it they do too? But I did, for sure, feel that
sometimes, actually, like pervasively, on a...low grade chronic level—is it them or is it me who‘s doing the distancing?
The fact that Hope chronically questioned the factors contributing to the perceived distance in her relationships suggests that this sense of ambiguity can play a substantial role in the
participants‘ experiences with others.
Since the gay and lesbian students struggled to know with any degree of certainty that a given behaviour was meant to harm them, they often found themselves ruminating about whether they may be misinterpreting the other person‘s actions. In the following extract, Hope explains the thoughts that tend to run through her head when she encounters a subtle behaviour for which she is unsure of the person‘s intentions.
If it‘s more subtle, then it‘s easier for me to then do that mental gymnastics and wonder, like, ―Is it me? Am I misinterpreting it? How do I understand this?‖ And then it kind of feels worse, because it‘s subtle, and then you‘re left to wonder and try to make sense of it. And do other people think that or did I misunderstand?
As Hope‘s words illustrate, when the participants encountered subtle behaviours they tended to expend energy and time trying to decipher the other person‘s actions and even began to doubt their own intuitive feelings about the situation. Hope‘s doubt about whether others present found the behaviour to be offensive also suggests there is less social consensus regarding the degree to which subtle behaviours are considered to be inappropriate. This doubt seemed to add to the uncertainty she experienced upon encountering subtle behaviours.
108
Similar to Hope, after a classmate failed to introduce Kelly to an acquaintance, she also pondered what could have been underlying that person‘s motives not to acknowledge her.
Are you scared that this person is going to think I‘m with you? Or, like, what is this?... Is this just how you treat everybody? So, who knows if it‘s like a generalized thing or if it is a specific thing?...Is it worth saying something about it? You know what, like maybe this person is struggling too, because they‘re uncomfortable with the situation. So, maybe, I should just like let them be uncomfortable and know that I‘m fine with myself, and, whatever, right?
Kelly‘s experience suggests that it may be even more difficult to understand the questionable actions of acquaintances because minimal information regarding what constitutes ―typical‖
behaviour for that person is available. Consequently, the uncertainty the gay and lesbian students experienced in their relationships with heterosexuals may be amplified in their interactions with persons with whom they have had limited contact. Further, when in a situation where she did not (and could not) know the other person‘s intentions, Kelly found that, in addition to questioning his/her motives, she began to question her own actions in relation to that person. In contrast to the confidence that Hope experienced in her responses to overt homonegativity, she also was reluctant to address subtle homonegative behaviours because she felt as though she lacked evidence to accuse someone of behaving negatively toward her in these situations.
The subtle stuff you don‘t have the validity to confront sometimes because they can point to it being something else. Like, um, ―Why didn‘t you invite me to your wedding? Is it because I‘m gay?‖ ―No,…I just didn‘t know if you‘d want to…‖ Or, you know, it could be a thousand other things...And if it‘s a really overt one, you feel, like, I feel like I would have the validity to address it, because I know and you know why you did that. But if it‘s really subtle, then maybe I wouldn‘t have a foot to stand on if I confronted it because, even if I‘m pretty sure that‘s the reason, it could just be chalked up to so many other things.
Thus, not only does the ambiguity that can overshadow gay and lesbian persons‘ relationships and interactions with heterosexuals make it difficult to definitively identity whether one has been the target of discrimination, it also can cause a person to doubt the appropriateness of his/her own actions.
5.2.4 Feeling Vulnerable
In addition to feeling that they lack evidence to address subtle homonegative behaviour, the extent to which the gay and lesbian students felt vulnerable in a given situation also affected their willingness to respond to these behaviours. For Alyssa, concerns that she will be singled out or unable to exit the situation if a confrontation escalates were at the forefront of her mind when
109
deciding whether to reprimand someone for using prejudicial language among a group of people with whom she was only minimally familiar.
I guess [it depends on] what my alternatives would be. If the only option to do is stand here and talk to them,...I'd be less likely to say something...I might not even be, like,
―Don't say stuff like that.‖ Because then I don't want to be the odd one out all day, if I'm stuck with people and the one who‘s going to bring up that sort of issue, you know? Or, if there's a different group of people to go talk to, you might just walk away, or you might say, ―Gay jokes are so gay,‖ you know, and just walk away. It depends what you have to go to, how you're going to handle the situation.
As Alyssa‘s words suggests, the participants were wary to create situations in which they may be ostracized or feel uncomfortable over extended periods of time.
The participants‘ moods and their self-confidence on a given day or in a given situation also affected their feelings of vulnerability and whether they were willing to address subtle homonegative behaviours. Kelly comments, ―If I‘m feeling good about myself, I‘m feeling confident about myself...and then I can stick up to it and it‘s fine. But there are times when you‘re feeling a little bit more vulnerable.‖ In fact, one‘s mood may even dictate how an anti-gay/lesbian behaviour is perceived and interpreted. Von explains how his interpretation of unintentional homonegative comments made in his presence depends, in part, upon how he is feeling about himself on a given day.
You will overhear it in different ways sometimes, and I guess it just depends on my mood too. Some days I'll say something about it, and other days I‘m just like, ―Yeah,
whatever.‖ If it's one of those days where I am willing to say something, it touches a nerve. I don't know how to describe it—it just touches a nerve sometimes. And I just want to like, [points at himself] you know, ―Hi!‖ But then other days, like I said, it's just not a big deal...Some days it really hits a nerve, and other days it doesn't.
Depending on his mood, Von sometimes experienced a strong desire to reveal himself as a gay man when he is around people who are using prejudicial language (and who are unaware of his sexual orientation) to defend himself among those who are inadvertently offending him.
However, on days when he is not feeling vulnerable, derogatory slang words and phrases do not bother him. Experiences such as Kelly‘s and Von‘s suggest that there is no singular response to being the target of anti-gay/lesbian behaviours and that how a behaviour is interpreted may depend upon a complex interplay between social and personal factors related to how secure one feels in relation to those around him/her.
110 5.2.5 Choosing Your Battles
Due to the challenges associated with identifying and confronting subtle homonegative behaviour, the gay and lesbian students sometimes experienced a sense of futility in relation to addressing these behaviours. In situations when it did not seem worthwhile to address these behaviours, they attempted to ―brush off‖ the behaviours or ignore their existence. Daniel explains, ―I am used to it and I just turn a blind eye to it, because I understand there‘s always going to be people who don‘t understand and ask us questions about that stuff. So I don‘t really care about that stuff anymore.‖ Several participants drew upon the metaphor of war to describe when and how they chose to address subtle anti-gay/lesbian behaviours. According to Hope:
At the time you just have to brush it off...School is demanding, and you just have so many battles to fight. Like, it‘s enough of a battle to keep your notes straight, you know...
Something like that happens, and you think it‘s the last thing I‘m going to confront today...I just kind of pushed aside some of those things and just focused...I would forget it...I think that my natural reaction is just to kind of dissociate a bit and to just not feel as participatory, even though I‘m still there.
Hope‘s description of the battle she experiences in deciding whether to confront or disregard homonegative behaviour reveal that the decision to confront such behaviour is often made in relation to the other stressors present in one‘s life. At certain moments (such as when Von felt compelled to reveal himself in his aforementioned experience), the participants‘ battle with homonegativity was of utmost importance to them, and they deemed it necessary to address these behaviours. However, there were moments when other aspects of their lives took priority, and they found themselves disengaging from the event or behaviour perceived to be homonegative to allow them to continue moving forward in their lives. Sheena comments, ―You just gotta kind of learn to brush it off. There‘s gonna be people worse than that.‖
5.2.6 Sacrificing Yourself
Adding to the complexity of how the gay and lesbian students experience and respond to subtle homonegative behaviours, several participants noted that sometimes they chose not to address these behaviours because they did not want to be responsible for precipitating situations in which others felt uncomfortable. After a friend stopped speaking with him after he invited him to a bar, Fred even went so far as to take it upon himself to learn how to prevent situations where homonegativity may be perpetrated. Fred describes how he struggled to make sense of a new friendship and wanted to learn how to avoid similar occurrences in the future.
111
―Did I do something wrong? Did I offend him in some way?...Does he think all of my friends are gay?...Did he think that I thought he was gay? Maybe I offended him that way?‖...Sometimes when you say something, and someone reacts badly, and you don‘t know why, it makes you feel like okay, well, I have to learn what I did wrong and next time not say that.
The situation to which Fred refers is another example of an interaction fraught with ambiguity.
Perhaps, the most revealing aspect of this incident was Fred‘s assumption that it is his
responsibility to be more careful about what he says and to learn how he is being interpreted to
responsibility to be more careful about what he says and to learn how he is being interpreted to