Hi Rory,

 

My dear fellow, never apologise for expressing your thoughts! They're most welcome. And, in fact, I think quite a valid observation. Yes, I think there is a definite similarity in the dynamic, there. I also think you hit the nail on the head, by using the term, "exploitation", and noting it as "selfish". Yes, to both. I also think it's great that, from your Debbie Harry reference, you were watching the original John Waters version of Hairspray, and not that awful Hollywood remake (yes, I'm a purist - sue me). I actually know the exact moment in the film you mean, and I think that's an interesting interpretation of the film's theme. Yes, we all know it's a statement about racism (a beautifully delivered one, in fact - please, everyone, see the original version, if you haven't already). But you're quite right, it does express this in a period of that strange cultural transition, where the dominant social world happily exploits something for shallow consumption, but denies it human rights. What a paradox. And yes, how selfish. It's the antithesis to empathy. I think, at the end of the day, it is empathy that human beings, at this point in our evolution, struggle with. Perhaps modernity is developmentally harmful - though, to be honest, if you look back over history, we have, in some ways, got better. That's a scary thought, I know! But it's true. But we still have an awful long way to go. That attitude, like the illustration in Hairspray, is about that society choosing to engage in "the other" for whatever they want to get out of it, but happily forcing that other to suffer, when it comes to actually connecting empathetically and acknowledging their right to exist equally as an other. That's what's so selfish in that dynamic. They'll dance about and have a good time to those black songs, but why give them their rights? What's in it for them? What shallow gratification does that bring?

 

And I think we see the same dynamic with where culture is now at with homosexuals, a people who actually have less rights than black people (not taking anything away from the - in the many ways, incomparable - plight of the indigenous population, etc). There are many disadvantaged groups in this world (basically any, mind you, that are not the "type" who have the power in this world), but no other portion of this society has anywhere near the same denial of rights. We live in a society that enforces and sanctions the intolerance and condemnation of homosexuals, that quite literally (when you look at situations like marriage, and the legal and financial ramifications of that) denies their existence. So, let's not get complacent about this society, just because the camp poofter on the television makes so many of those bogans chuckle. How many of those bogans think that homosexuals and lesbians should be able to marry? Have the right to being a parent? Be legally recognised through superannuation, welfare, etc? How many would feel comfortable with their sons hanging out with a gay boy, or even actually being gay? The rather vacuous giggle from watching these camp characters does not always connect to the reality of these people's ideas, in the way that so many would like to think it does, when it comes to the crunch. And yes, that's no doubt extremely similar to the black struggle - even the struggle of women in this society (who are far from equal). I'm sure people said, "Well, they're doing okay, now - look, there's that black woman with a number one record, for heaven's sake - what a long way we've come!" Not far enough, I'm afraid. When women wanted equal working rights, many men often declared, "They can get a job as a secretary and earn a living! What's their problem?!" And today, we still live in a country run almost exclusively by white men, with boardrooms predominantly male, and, statistically speaking, a society where women are paid less than men. Sure, they've made some steps, if you compare it to ye old days (that's nearly always the retort, I find); but that's a cop out. They're still discriminated against. Why should anyone - gay, black, female, whatever - "setlle" for any level of inequality. I don't, I must say. I won't accept my inequality. It saddens me when so many do, and when this culture is so efficient in that way in which it lulls people into complacency, and into settling, as well as the rather understandable inability to do this that one can end up having, when one is subjected to a life of inequality (hello, it affects you!). I suppose that's the emotion that drives articles like the one I wrote about Zach.

 

Anyway, thanks for writing in, Rory. You managed to provide me with some thought, there, and so the cyber relationship is mutual! I love being provoked, too, and would hate to think anyone thought they could not write in and add to what they perceive as me saying from up here on my high horse. I love hearing perspectives and situations of people, of experiences and subjectivities. So, in future, write in with whatever crosses your mind, that's absolutely fine by me. All good.

 

Thanks so much,

Aaron