CHAPTER 5: HETERO- AND HOMONORMATIVE INFLUENCES ON GAY AND
5.5 Group identification: Student organisations and heteronormativities
5.5.1 Heteronormativity and campus culture
5.5.1.2 Forming part of campus organisations comprising heterosexual members
Only 11 participants (Bambi, Bernice, Brett, Carol, Hein, IDK, Lindsey, Matthew, Max, Tanya and Yellow) reported forming part of a campus organisation comprising heterosexual individuals. Four participants (IDK, Max, Tanya, Yellow) joined such an organisation because they wanted to contribute to the larger university community. In addition to joining the NWU green team, Max (gay) also joined the Student Academic Council “because I love to contribute to student life”. The organisation Tanya (lesbian) joined was described as “based on the same disciplines as most religions and because the majority of members are religious, they also portray heteronormativity”.
Yellow (lesbian) was influenced to join when she arrived in Potchefstroom, wanting to continue
“what I’ve been taught in high school because we had a principle” that taught them to “give [one’s]
time to the community”. Consider IDK’s (lesbian) reasons for joining such an organisation:
I am involved with SJGD [SRCS]14 and all of the members on my committee are straight. We are united in our vision and goal to better the lives of those in less fortunate circumstances and that transcends our sexual orientation. I joined these organisations to make an impact and have purpose bigger than myself. I won’t say, ‘hi, I am [my name] and I am a lesbian’, the first time we meet. When it comes to campus organisations, I adopt the; ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ policy. If they ask about my relationship status, I would say, ‘Yes, I am in a relationship’, if they ask ‘Oh, and what does he study?’ I would say ‘she’ and ‘she is doing a master’s degree in education’.
Brett (gay) and Matthew (gay) also mentioned joining such an organisation regardless of sexual orientation. Brett stated: “I joined based on common interest”. Matthew added: “it is something that I love. Examples would be sports like soccer, rugby, athletics and the hostel”. Hein (gay) and Lindsey (pansexual) similarly joined such organisations because they had an interest in the specific area the organisation focussed on. Hein joined the “NWU Symphonic Orchestra” because he loved “playing music”. Lindsey joined such an organisation because she was “interested and wanted to gain leadership and organisational experience. I don’t know if there are any exclusively heterosexual organisations on campus, but I think hostels come pretty close”. Bambi (pansexual) also joined a hostel where “the majority of the ladies are straight”. Bernice (lesbian) reported joining a religious organisation “for my personal growth”, and Carol (bisexual) joined Campus Pride “to feel more at home and have people like me around to feel safe”.
14 Student Rag Community Service - the NWU-Potchefstroom Campus’ registered welfare organisation.
Some participants also gave reasons for not forming part of an organisation on campus with heterosexual individuals. Ikai, Martha, Mukwevho, Padro and Sienna reported not having enough time to join such an organisation. Mukwevho (lesbian) added that she was not a “person that gets involved in these things. I am already involved in a lot of things. I won’t have time for schoolwork or my personal organisation”. Martha (lesbian/queer) additionally explained that she did “not want to spend my free time with people whom I cannot come out to”. Four participants (Granger, Lee, May, Sienna) described being too introverted to join such an organisation. Sienna (lesbian) stated that she “would rather have my own get together with people I feel comfortable with. I have social anxiety with most strangers regardless of sexual orientation”. May (pansexual) said that she got
“stressed and overwhelmed” when spending “too much time around other people”. Jennifer (bi- curious) stated “the ideology underpinning any endorsement of hegemonic identities makes me uncomfortable as it risks being exclusivist and potentially discriminatory”.
(a) Positive features associated with joining a mixed-contingent organisation
Participants were asked about the positive and negative features of organisations with a mixed contingent of heterosexual and gay and lesbian members.
Eighteen participants (Brett, Carol, Eric, Granger, Heidi, IDK, Ikai, Jennifer, Lee, Lindsey, Martha, Max, May, Ndlovu, Richy, Sienna, Skylar, Tanya) mentioned how exposure to diversity could encourage tolerance and understanding. Ikai (gay, black, Natural Science) felt it might help
“eliminate homophobia”. Skylar (gay) argued, “we can all share stories and understand each other a little better”. Granger’s (lesbian) response, resembling the idea that assimilating might be easier, posited “you get different points of views and can better appeal to everyone on campus”. Ndlovu (lesbian) argued it could help “form a deeper understanding of each other’s lives and struggles”.
Martha (lesbian/queer) stated that “familiarity can be the gateway drug to empathy”. Tanya (lesbian) added that “being open about the members could entice other onlookers with similar orientations to join the group as they know the atmosphere is accepting and open”. Consider Lindsey’s (pansexual) response:
I think if there’s a mixture of heterosexual and LGBT+ individuals in an organisation, the stigma around homosexuality is lessened in the eyes of the straight members who get to know us beyond just the stereotypes. Often, I won’t tell people I’m pansexual until the opportune moment, by which time they’ve gotten to know me, and the reaction is therefore not as severe as I think it would have been. If someone is homophobic towards a stranger it doesn’t carry the same weight as being homophobic towards a friend who they’ve come to trust, and I firmly believe it might cause them to think twice in a similar situation,
although I recognise that them not being homophonic towards me is a personal situation that may not pan out to a different context.
Additionally, Jennifer (bi-curious) thought that the acceptance of a mixed contingent could breed
“is particularly important in contexts where minority groups (such as LGBTQ+) have been historically excluded, marginalised and demonised by hegemonic groups”. Heidi (pansexual) thought it could also breed “respect”. Eric (gay) argued it allowed “more original thoughts to come to the table and special dynamics to be formed”. May (pansexual) recalled her brother's first make- over: “As it turns out, my 6’3" bearded brother can really rock blue and orange eyeshadow”. Max (gay) spoke of how a mixed contingent could break down stereotypes:
I think the most positive thing for me is that it puts people (gay or straight) in a situation together where your sexuality doesn’t matter, so it shows straight people that even though I am gay, it has nothing to do with my ability to be part of a team and contribute equally to something just as well as any straight person, so it breaks down the idea that gay people are incapable of being as good a leader or team player in any context as straight people. It kind of reinforces the idea that being gay is a personal thing and that my sexuality is practiced in privacy, so being next to me and working next to me will not make you gay.
The arguments in favour of creating increased understanding were also noted by Bambi (pansexual), Bernice (lesbian), Padro (homosexual) and Richy (gay). Bambi said, “you can learn how to properly treat each other and learn of each other’s trials”. Padro added “just to understand the dynamics and generals”. Lindsey (pansexual), Sienna (lesbian) and Yellow (lesbian) thought a mixed contingent could bring people “together” for a communal “cause” or “goal”. Sienna stated
“when we all work together; we can accomplish amazing things. It’s our differences that make us stronger”. Lindsey thought it could “give way to more sensitive marketing, a more accepting and non-assumption-based approach”. Lindsey’s continuing statement resembles the concept of autonomy and liberation: “only if the LGBT+ members feel empowered to make their stance known, and if the rest of the team take them seriously”. Ikai (gay) and Richy believed a mixed contingent could offer “community” and “unity”. Hein (gay) felt “everyone can just be themselves and be friendly and happy in the presence of music”.
(b) Negative features associated with joining a mixed-contingent organisation
Thirteen participants (Bambi, Brett, Eric, Granger, Heidi, IDK, Jennifer, May, Ndlovu, Sienna, Skylar, Tanya, Yellow) believed that mixed beliefs or pre-existing bias in a mixed-contingent organisation could result in conflict or discrimination. IDK (lesbian) stated:
In my experience, there will always be that one person who is not accepting of homosexuality. In social settings at the NWU, it is mostly fuelled by religion, and you will find the one posting all those praise and worship invitations on WhatsApp, saying I personally don’t agree with being gay but it’s your life, and you can choose your own lifestyle whatever makes you happy. I think as a woman it’s a bit easier because these straight males usually accept lesbians easier than they do gay men.
Sienna (lesbian) similarly said there would always be someone who “sees being gay as a bad thing or a sin and [makes one] feel unwelcome, or like [one's] opinion matters less or that [one is]
a lesser person”. Tanya (lesbian) thought it could result in “secrecy, judgement and mistrust, especially when this bias is shared by the majority”. May (pansexual) thought homophobic individuals “makes it difficult to accomplish goals and ensuring all of the members feel safe and welcome in the group”. Brett (gay) argued it could lead to “being excluded from conversations”.
Eric (gay) thought it could further “a divide occurring between the straight and gay individuals when differences are not accepted and discussed openly”.
Lee (lesbian), Lindsey (pansexual) and Padro (homosexual) believed a mixed-contingent organisation could have members who “fail” (Padro) to tolerate gay or lesbian individuals. Padro stated that “this is where people need to learn to be compassion and have tolerance”. Lee said
“there are usually negative side comments or usually unnecessary questions regarding the LGBTI+ community”. Lindsey added that “LGBT+ members would likely be in the minority and might feel unsafe or excluded from the organisation”. Hein (gay) similarly said “gay people might not be willing to be open or themselves around straight people”. Four participants (Bernice, Martha, Max, Richy) thought being part of a mixed-contingent organisation could “expose” one as non-heterosexual. Richy (gay) argued that, as a non-heterosexual member in the organisation,
“you run the risk of being persecuted by smallminded people. Over-exposure and becoming the only reference as being the gay one”. Martha (lesbian/queer) said it scared her: “new straight friends” would “out” her, and she could lose her job.