Last night I attended the launch of an Australian first: a nationwide campaign that encourages people to stand up against homophobia.
Called simply No To Homophobia, it includes two television ads that will receive mainstream airplay. The ads feature real-life examples of homophobic, biphobic and transphobic comments being directed at an individual, and overheard by another.
A voiceover asks, “Have you witnessed anything like this?” as the incidents unfold, and encourage the viewer to respond, take action, stand up and put a stop to it. Take a look:
The campaign comes with some pretty powerful backing: the Victorian Police, state government (who partially funded it), champion gay hockey player Gus Johnston, and even the AFL.
Mainstream media reaction to the campaign’s launch has been positive, particularly with regards to the AFL’s involvement. Said Herald Sun columnist Susie O’Brien:
It’s time to stop saying, “Oh that’s so gay’’ about something you don’t like – not to mention calling someone a f—ing homo. And it’s time to speak up when other people make homophobic jokes and comments. If you witness harassment and violence and do nothing, you are encouraging it to continue.
But here’s the problem. The actual ads themselves are largely populated by examples of homophobic bullying that could best be described as mild.
In one, a woman working on a building site asks for a hand from her male workmates and gets the response: “I thought you lesbians were supposed to be as good as us blokes.”
In another, at a sports club, a guy changing into his training gear (outside, with clothes still on), has another player quip: “You’d be loving this mate, wouldn’t ya?”
There’s little to rival the outright homophobia that O’Brien references, and that we all have seen and witnessed.
Anna Brown, co-convenor of the Victorian Gay & Lesbian Rights Lobby, said at last night’s launch that the ads were the result of years worth of research into the discrimination experiences of LGBT Victorians.
This left me with the uncomfortable question: given that these ads are targeted at the general population, are these the worst examples they could come up with?
In sport alone, one needs only to look so far as Come Out To Play, a research report on homophobia in sport produced by Victoria University, VicHealth and the Outgames Legacy Fund in May 2010. Here’s some quotes:
The coach referred to all as a bunch of fags for not winning the game. I was not yet out to anyone and it reinforced the message that who I was is something to be ashamed of. (Alan, 23 years).
A spectator kept yelling “get the dyke” to the people on the other team. (Danielle, 35 years).
Just accusations — poof, faggot, etc… of course, I hated myself. (Elijah, 31 years).
Some male soccer players shouted abuse like ‘fucking dykes’ etc and crossed the road. I felt angry and upset. (Julia, 27 years).
Other examples in the ads certainly get the point across: the transwoman who is publicly blocked by a café proprietor from using the women’s toilets because they’re only for “real women”; the gay man at work called “princess” by a colleague and having a tiara left on his desk; the teacher telling a female student to remove her gay pride necklace because “we don’t all need to hear about it” (although I would have thought that teachers standing by and doing nothing while students commit acts of homophobic bullying would have been a worse problem – see this report).
Comments online have echoed sentiments expressed when the WTF anti-homophobia campaign was recently launched in New Zealand: gratitude that the campaign exists, admiration for the community organisations involved and their hard work, which I certainly agree with.
One dissenter on the campaign’s Facebook page was referred to as “Captain Buzzkill”, and while I’m aware that I’m opening myself up for the same criticism, I find myself questioning the soft-soap approach to the ads, particularly when at the end of one, the lesbian woman who experienced a relatively mild jibe from a workmate is seen reporting it to the police (really?).
In road safety campaigns, we’ve never shied away from showing the graphic reality associated with drunk driving and speeding. In launching No To Homophobia, the punches have – quite literally – been pulled, which is perplexing considering that one in four GLBT Australians have been physically attacked during their lifetime.
Are we afraid of frightening the horses by showing the more overt and brutal forms of homophobia that occur? Is there a concern that audiences might just switch off if they see someone being called a “fucking homo”? (although such a taunt was enough to see a St Kilda Football Club player fined $3,000 for using it against an opponent earlier this month).
My concern is, given the target audience of mainstream Australians and their general ignorance of everyday prejudice, there’s a risk that some may just respond, “is that it?” Particularly when the examples are accompanied by a deadly serious voiceover and piano music.
Homophobia in all its forms needs to be challenged, but for a campaign that’s been granted the rare privilege of airtime on mainstream telly, I thought we might have started with the big stuff, especially when the Australian Christian Lobby can be heard saying far worse things in the media about us and they get that coverage for free.
The No To Homophobia campaign is set to run for the next year. Perhaps it will evolve along the way, and most importantly, create further discussion. Because we need it.
Pingback: No to homophobia: fixing the broken windows « Bipolar Bear
I agree that these harassment/bullying examples are a “1″ on a scale that goes to ten. I received worse in middle school and even at the time considered THAT mild, something I could put my head down and ignore (not that one should, or should have to).
I think these ads are valid as a starting point, but frankly, they should proceed upward, step wise, all the way to the proverbial “10,” including severe assault, rape, murder, progressing to actual events, documentary style. This would not be mere “shock value.” It’s reality, and would show true caring for the truth, and LGBT human beings.
It’s fairly obvious that if the existing campaign is all there is, from “years of research,” then much of that research was focused on not “going too far” or “offending people,” as though anything showing more deeply into the real events and problems would, what? Show the true extent of disregard, meanness and hatred that ACTUALLY exists? Who were they trying to assuage, placate or avoid offending?
Perhaps this, and not much more, is simply the stage we’re at in many countries: the “appropriately small, bandaid phase.” I’m being harsh and critical here, especially when it IS a bit of progress; Unless that’s all there is.
Maybe it was the “ads were the result of years worth of research” thing that set me off. I could have written those ads (aiming for the most banal and least “offensive” of course) in my sleep in a single night, to be played during sports match breaks. A bit of progress? Ok, I suppose, yes. But tenfold more rigorous and to the point “research” goes into an insurance commercial in 100th the preparation time.
An LGBT organization with its own funding would be better to be in charge of this. Thus ends my little rant.
Pingback: Left handed thinking « Bipolar Bear
I’m guessing, now that I look at again, that the “mild” homophobia add needed a cop for political reasons. The Anti -Violence Project and Vic Police both had a stake in making it. Sounds like the writers had a challenging time fitting a cop in. Hence the clunky ending. Shame, it really just makes us look like helpless victims or worse yet, wingers who shouldn’t be taken seriously.
i never see direct homophobia, i just see people call things they dont like “thats gay”, which implies that gay is not likeable.
I think most people would find that going to the police could be even more intimidating than the original incident and wouldn’t expect anything but more trouble from doing that. Have things really changed that much with the Australian police?
I remember my cousin’s 26 y.o. son who was doing some DJ work playing some music to me from his phone and making the comment that what was playing was his sister’s music and was really ‘gay’. I thought using ‘gay’ to mean ‘inferior or poor’ etc. was school children’s speak and asked “What do you mean. like Kylie Monogue?” Well he was living in Newcastle.
The only directly homophobic incident I recall in the last 20 years was coming home from the beach and opening the driveway gate in my bright orange short-shorts-like togs and being seen by some girls around 10 years old on their bikes from the village calling out something like ‘homo’ and cycling up the driveway. I rang school administration and explained it didn’t matter whether we were gay or not, but the result is the same. Homophobic actions can be against people who aren’t gay. (In Brisbane a man was murdered because two guys thought he was gay and they may have got off lightly because of the homosexual panic excuse-defense.) Anyway, he assured me they would be talking to all the students in the area that such behaviour wasn’t acceptable.
Which comes to the point that was asked at a Radical Faerie gathering; had anyone experienced homophobia? A couple of people said they’d experienced negativity or discrimination for the way they appeared- not for being gay, but for being a hippy or a feral. One guy left the local gym because of the comments made to him. (The gym members have improved lately, compared to 4-5 years ago, now that the Workers Club have regulated it a bit more,) These days, I feel people especially in workplace situations are becoming more aware of what is not on. So some will just put more of their intolerance towards others who are left out of the anti-discrimination policies although I’ve seen a ‘Playschool’ story about accepting people who are different (regarding the ‘Autistic Spectrum’) as well as anti-bullying because of some-one’s weight or appearance. There still is some (American) attempts at humour about ‘geeks’, ‘nerds’ and ‘dorks’, and some hospital staff will not give treatment to people they think may be drug-users. There are quite a few conditions that resemble drug abuse to many people. I read a comment made about people with Asperger’s Syndrome as looking like they were ‘stoned’, and this makes sense to me and fits in partially with that nasty police incident in Christchurch. Could there be an expansion to educating the public and the law about discrimination based on any perceived differences from the ‘norm’ and not just certain categories?
One more thing…have they taken down those large billboards and TV adds about drivers who speed having small penises? They don’t show guys waving their little pinky (finger) at women who speed, do they?
P.S. I’m looking forward to seeing if these adds make it to our Queensland screens… And at what time on air?
Granted I see both sides of the coin in your argument Chris I know what you mean. I think that these are mild ones at best. However I think mild bullying from a coworker has a lot more weight on it than a case of harsh bullying from a stranger who you’ll never see again in your life.
I mean having to go into work or a place of business everyday and tolerate the same treatment and live with the knowledge that they’re disapproving of you wears on your mind. Random strangers I can just shout back at them and disregard if I choose.
The fear of reporting and complaining about your superiors taunts and suffering some kind of lash back is ever present. So rarely people ever come forward. I think these ads and the campaign are here to try and tell us you can stand up for yourself.
Plus I’d like to think that the Australian populace can put two-and-two together and realise that these are mild examples of bullying that are made PG friendly for TV (let’s hope I’m not wrong…). And it’s a nation first and positive step in the right direction, so I’ll take whatever support I can get. Great article mate.
I think I kinda agree and disagree with you here, Active Cubby – the ‘dripping tap’ perspective of workplace homophobia, wherein it’s constant, relentless and sometimes has it’s barb veiled with humour can cause debilitating depression – a lot of people don’t believe they can get away from this kind of homophobia in the work place… AND YET, then there’s the issue of when homophobic comments are made in fun and not intended to be hurtful or harmful… I have a great colleague, someone I like and respect and KNOW he doesn’t have a genuinely homophobic bone in his body (he treats everyone with the same level of humourous disrespect!!!) who is ALWAYS having a go… but it never upsets me, because I know it’s intended in fun (let’s not touch the knock on effect that it may green light abusive, homophobic behaviour from people who are NOT having fun!)… I guess I’m reminded of something a radical, feminist lesbian once said in our workplace in New Zealand, when she was asked what to do about so-called humourous ribbing that was homophobically based… she said that she went by the principle of how things “feel”… “if it didn’t feel nice, it wasn’t meant nice!” Good parameters? I think so…
At least it is a step in the right direction. Maybe not having more offensive terms is actually a positive since these will be seen in mass media it will not be teaching children new words that they should not be using.
I think that they may be trying to tell the public that even something as mild as the comments in the adverts is offensive and wrong – it would be good if they did a range of adverts with more severe examples as well.
I generally agree. What I don’t get is the message at the end. Go to the cops over work place harassment? When would/has/why that ever happened? Would the cops even take you seriously if that was your first port of call?