Jaq Bayles asks – is the removal of a poster from an LGBTQ Facebook page because it contains the word ‘dyke’ an hysterical reaction to something clearly intended as a bit of seasonal fun?
Hey, let’s have some fun – it is that time of year after all. Put your hands up if you identify as a poof, queer, fag, dyke, lezzer. Give us a cheer if you embrace those words as part of your culture, if you don’t mind when someone calls you that in the street because you own the word.
Wasn’t that fun? Not if you’re a member of Sussex University’s LGBTQ group, apparently – with the exception of ‘queer’, which is part of its name. To that particular group of people, the word ‘dyke’ is ‘offensive’ and ‘triggering’ and was deemed insulting enough to warrant the removal of a poster from its Facebook page on the grounds that it violated its ‘safe space’ policy. One would assume then, that said poster was some kind of attack on the lesbian community, or at the very least that it was using the word ‘dyke’ in a derogatory fashion.
Not so. Rather it was a humorous tagline to a festive show by lesbian authors and performers Rose Collis and VG Lee, as in ‘Dyke the Halls’. It was a play on words by two women who self-identify as ‘dykes’, carrying on a long tradition in the gay world of risque wordplay and the equally long tradition by any number of so-called ‘minority’ groups of reclaiming words that have been used by others as insults in order to strip them of their power. Regardless of the fact that the word ‘dyke’ has long been reclaimed by the wider lesbian community (I have on my bookshelves a series of comic books from the early 1990s called Dykes to Watch Out For by Alison Bechdel), I appreciate that many lesbians would resent having the word flung at them by non-lesbians with intent to insult. But this is clearly not the case.
So why did the university group feel the need to remove the post? ‘dyke’ offended some members The LGBTQ society defended its decision thus: “We have not removed an opinion piece, or a member’s comment/statement, neither have we told members that we are not allowing them to identify as dyke or express that they are dykes. What we did do is remove a poster, of which we have no obligation to allow on our page, because the word ‘dyke’ being used in the poster offended some members, members which we have a duty to protect as a university society which caters to LGBTQ individuals from various country of origins and ages who may have different interpretations and lived experiences.”
Call me old-fashioned, but it strikes me that by taking down this post the society has handed back to the word ‘dyke’ the negative power that women have fought for decades to diffuse.
Let’s consider what the Urban Dictionary has to say on the matter: “Dyke – Although originally a derogatory term for lesbians, it is now often used with pride by lesbians themselves, especially the younger and hipper lesbian crowd… In fact some dykes resent being called a lesbian, as they feel it is much less cool than being called a dyke.” decades of protest dismissed.
Now, I have no idea of the age or level of hipness of those people who felt offended by the terminology, but I do know that I feel offended that decades of protesting, marching and campaigning by so many thousands of women – and men – can be so lightly tossed aside because one word doesn’t sit well with a few.
The world is a different – and safer – place for gay people now thanks to the fight most people who faced coming out in the 1980s (and before) were confronted with. They stood up for themselves, they battled blind prejudice with reason and human rights arguments and they paved the way to a society that today – despite some clear opponents – is more accepting of gay people and their lifestyles.
For a gay group to undermine the achievements of this work in the area of semantics by caving into what sounds like a hysterical reaction to something clearly intended as a bit of seasonal fun is puzzling at best – dangerous at worst.
The group justifies its response to ‘dykegate’ on its website: “We applaud that individuals are able to choose their own labels instead of relying solely on those a heteronormative society try’s (sic) to enforce, and we are thankful for the hard work of those who came before us who fought for liberation and the reclamation of words once used negatively towards members of the LGBTQ community and fully support those who continue to do so. We now understand that it was simply being used in a humorous manner, but when a complaint is made we have to decide an action.”
I’d suggest that you’d need to have had a humour bypass NOT to have understood it was “being used in a humorous manner” before that fact was pointed out to you. And it might have been pertinent to consider the kind of backlash such an action was likely to incur. By all means stay safe, Sussex University LGBTQ group, but you might want to consider that if the thousands of gay rights campaigners over the years had taken that option, you might not now be in a position to do so.
The official response from The Sussex LGBTQ Society:
To all those concerned:
“We would like to apologise to those offended by the actions recently undertaken on the Sussex LGBTQ Society Facebook page. Having discussed issues regarding discursive reappropriation at length, we decided that the policy of safe space interacted with this reappropriation in various and, at times, problematic ways, and while we welcome conversation concerning the issue, we would like to express the rationale behind this decision-making process at this point in time.
“Early in the semester, society members expressed an issue with an advertisement that utilised and began the work of reappropriating the word “fag,” and given the triggering nature of such a term, we, as a society, determined that the usage of such a word, though noble in its efforts towards reclamation, was best left off the page.
“Considering the word’s ability to call to mind times of oppression, abuse, and discrimination, this reappropriation troubled the society’s primary goal of maintaining a safe space. However, recognizing the subjective nature of such a stance, and also mindful of the diverse ages and cultural backgrounds of our group’s members, the decision was made that the Facebook page was not the proper place for continued reappropriation. For many of our members, such terms are associated with painful memories from a youth not long gone. Therefore, as both “dyke” and “fag” had occasioned complaints from our society’s members, we decided to remove them at this point.
“While the Sussex LGBTQ Society is deeply concerned and passionate about issues within the wider LGBTQ community, it is the welfare of our group’s members that must remain our first and foremost concern. Similarly, as the Facebook page is a reflection of the society, its members, and their beliefs, we felt that this decision, though difficult to make, best reflected this commitment to a safe space.
“As a society, we welcome continued discussion of issues regarding reappropriation, and we have been considering hosting an event centred upon this topic, which will be discussed later. Although we believe debate and sympathetic conversation are inherent values to our society, the Facebook page is not the intended place in which these conflicting viewpoints are meant to meet.
“Finally, we encourage our society’s members to self-identify in whichever way best reflects their understanding of self, and we do hope that our members from a variety of identities will aid us in our attempt to comprehend more fully this issue and the best means by which to proceed.
“Our aim is not censorship, and this February, during LGBTQ History Month, we are planning to host a discussion on issues concerning reappropriation. At the moment, members of the aforementioned group that have begun reclamation of “fag” have politely offered to come and speak, and we hope that others who have begun reclamation of “dyke” might be willing to do the same. At this point in time, we hope to include a variety of identities, students, faculty members, and individuals within the greater queer community in order to hold a civil, progressive, constructive, and informative conversation.
“Lastly, and as stated previously, we welcome input from our group’s members as a means of better creating a safe space policy that seeks to accomplish the tremendous task of protecting all of its members. During the past several years, the society has held debates similar to the one mentioned above regarding the use of the word “queer,” and this has greatly aided our ability to support our self-identifying queer students.
“While we stand by the difficult decision we have made, this decision is open to transformation and change if we feel that it continues to abide by the safe space policy and also reflects the beliefs of our members as well. We hope that our openness to continued discussion and adaptation, combined with our efforts to continue supporting a safe space, will allow us to improve our ability to interact with and support our members, our allies, and our friends and peers in the greater LGBTQ community.
“We respectfully ask that further communication is not directed at individual group or committee members. If any questions, complaints, or other comments need to be made, then we welcome feedback at sussexlgbtq@gmail.com
“If you would like to find out more information on the safe space policy please visit our website http://sussexlgbtq.weebly.com/safe-space-policy.html
The Sussex LGBTQ Society
You must be logged in to post a comment.