I'm going to have to agree with the majority herre and say yes. That's like assuming a man in China is Chinese. He may not be, and threr are a lot of people in China who are definately not Chinese, but you've got very, very good odds they are. Even if the person is gay, they'd probably treat the assumtion with an ammused chuckle and "oh, ha I'm gay". Hell people have thought I'm gay before, and that's basically how I react.
Poll: Is it wrong to automatically assume some is heterosexual?
- Thread starter Aur0ra145
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No, it is only wrong to assume someone to be homosexual due to the way they dress/act, therefore you are applying stereotypes.
the sarcasm isnt appreciated. My friend at Pitt gets crucified everyday by the little republicans committee or whatever the club calls itself for being gay, and mercilessly taunted. There's been many a nights he's called me or one of our friends at the end of his rope.manaman said:
I simply stated it as a way of showing that assumptions are pointless and somewhat shameful, cause it shouldnt matter if they're hetero or not. But, seeing as how that wasnt he point, you should show the same courtesy for people who enjoy members of the same sex
It's not wrong to assume someone is straight because approximately 90% of the population is heterosexual, so in all likelihood, you're probably talking to a straight person.
What is wrong is to assume gay people don't exist, to intentionally make them invisible in our culture, or to outright discriminate against them.
Obviously if you assume someone is straight and they correct you, you shouldn't say anything like "You're gay? But you seem so normal". Just politely apologize and don't call them straight anymore - it's not really a big deal.
What is wrong is to assume gay people don't exist, to intentionally make them invisible in our culture, or to outright discriminate against them.
Obviously if you assume someone is straight and they correct you, you shouldn't say anything like "You're gay? But you seem so normal". Just politely apologize and don't call them straight anymore - it's not really a big deal.
Nah, s'not wrong. It's wrong to think that they are wrong if they're homosexual, but the assuming part isn't wrong unless it's obvious. Guy wearing pink might be, but it's not obvious, and you're not psychic. And really, they shouldn't spaz out if you say anything. The gay community ought to be able to look you in the eye when you're assumption is wrong and politely say "I am not left right-handed.".
I haven't heard of someone being offended for being assumed to be heterosexual at first sight, but I don't keep up with the news outside of my county. Judging from all the previous comments it seems that it is normal to assume people you meet are heterosexual until they prove otherwise.
And now you see how effective your use of sarcasm is on people. You right now have a taste of the same feelings other people have to one degree or another on reading what you posted. It does nothing to help your cause. It just further alienates the same people you are trying to get through to.emeraldrafael said:
It wasnt sarcasm, or wasnt meant to be. I know sarcasm doesnt carry well over the internet, so if I use it, its usually followed be "/sarcasm." Or if I had wanted it to be, I would have phrased it and said something like, "why would you need to make and assumption? Everyone knows gay people shit rainbows, leave sparkling footprints, and look FABULOUS".manaman said:
Thats just straight up honestly, cause thats the stereotype I see alot. That, or a man who shouts fabulous alot and wears hot pink, talks in a high tone, and or is in your face and giving you fashion tips you didnt ask for.
Wow this is a terrible thread, half a second of thinking could have answered this unbelievably obvious question.
It seems you must be out looking for that. Its the only reason I can think of for why you really do think that is such a pervasive stereotype that could honestly think what you initially said didn't deserve a little scoffing.emeraldrafael said:
I haven't really seen that popping up often in over a decade. Unless the character is comic relief or in Japanese media.
Sure just like with everything there are probably some negative stereotypes that are sticking around, but its no worse then those sticking around for other groups and ethnicitys.
About the only thing understandable is your dislike of those that show no tolerance to anything different. Understandable, but not reasonable. Where is succumbing to hatred and styling to their level going to get you? Show them and everyone else around you that you are better then that. Tell your friend that they have small minds to hate something just for being different and that reacting to their hate is exactly what they want. ignoring them is probably the best thing he can do. Anger and fear are what they are after. Give them defiance and apathy.
There's no need to assume anything. If you don't know somebody then just be open minded. There is no harm in that, but assuming somebody is heterosexual could (although it is unlikely)lead to an awkward social moment.
This is a good policy on everything. The fact that your assumption is probably right isn't a justification.
I don't assume that octogenarians are computer illiterate, even if it statistically likely that they are.
You shouldn't assume that somebody who is clearly overweight doesn't exercise enough or eat right, even though that is probably the case.
This is a good policy on everything. The fact that your assumption is probably right isn't a justification.
I don't assume that octogenarians are computer illiterate, even if it statistically likely that they are.
You shouldn't assume that somebody who is clearly overweight doesn't exercise enough or eat right, even though that is probably the case.
Is there really anything wrong with assuming people occupy the vast majority (more than 9/10 if I'm right)
You must not be in a heavily conservative republican populated area.manaman said:
Look, I posted what I posted. I dont need the scrutiny, and I dont need this to develop into a big thing. I think thats going to happen in another thread and its getting late where I live, as well as I have something of a head ache from earlier today. I have personal reasons for disliking people that dislike gay people (not saying hte OP or anyone who posted here does, just saying). Its rather hard to ignore these people when they harass him daily and almost hourly, and three of them have some kinda sway cause they're relatives are moderate monetary donators to the school, so they get a free run as long as they dont physically hurt someone (and even then there's been cases where thats happened and it conveniently got "buried under other incidents of greater importance to the students well being").
So far, we havent done anyting, except show that being gay isnt the stereotype (if you looked at my friend, aside from the fact he always likes to hang on my arm cause he thinks he'll turn me into his lover one day, but he only does it around me, he doesnt look gay at all). There's been no violence, no nothing, just friends supporting a crying and hurt friend. Does that satisfy you so that I can sit on my moral high horse and look down upon the close minded with an air of superiority?
It's neither right to prejudge a person about anything (sexuality included) nor wrong to know there's a higher statistical likelihood a person is heterosexual than any other sexuality. It is, however, wrong more often than not when you live by easy absolutes.
This is what's known as the heteronormative paradigm - since the majority of people you meet will be straight, our brain is designed to make that assumption by inductive generalisation. The problem isn't really the paradigm, it's people who aren't able to think outside of it; you know, the folks who can't handle the idea that someone else might have a different sexual attitude to them. Also, there is an issue when the paradigm is written into law, as with marriage in many countries, because then it becomes a tool of exclusion rather than a simple mental shortcut. This is what's called straight privilege - the things in society that are automatically available to straight folks that can't be accessed by people not fitting the heteronormative mould (this holds for other types of social stigma like white privilege and male privilege also). The tricky thing about this sort of privilege is that it's really easy to take for granted when you're on the good side of it, and unconsciously perpetuate the disadvantage without really thinking about it, like using 'gay' to describe something bad or presuming feminine traits are required to be gay.
But the good news is that the best thing you can do is simply be aware of the social bias, and try not to perpetuate it. Thus, simply by being the kind of person who asks themselves if it's really fair to assume heteronormality, you're proving that you're the sort of person that can think outside that box and will be accepting of peoples' differences.
tl;dr - is it wrong to assume someone is straight until proven otherwise? Not at all. Is it good that you're thinking about this as a question, rather than just doing it? Absolutely.
But the good news is that the best thing you can do is simply be aware of the social bias, and try not to perpetuate it. Thus, simply by being the kind of person who asks themselves if it's really fair to assume heteronormality, you're proving that you're the sort of person that can think outside that box and will be accepting of peoples' differences.
tl;dr - is it wrong to assume someone is straight until proven otherwise? Not at all. Is it good that you're thinking about this as a question, rather than just doing it? Absolutely.
I am not heterosexual, and I am not offended when someone assumes I am. Simply put, a vast majority of people admit to being heterosexual. When someone assumes otherwise about me, I correct them and move on with my day. Better things to do than waste time pissing about.