LGBT nursing homes?

Annasopra

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/senator-asks-oireachtas-to-consider-the-need-for-lgbtqi-nursing-homes-1.2897095#.WEiSwthAHAc.twitter

Sinn Fein says that there may be a need for specific lgbtqi nursing homes? Do you think this is a good idea?

rdavey14

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/senator-asks-oireachtas-to-consider-the-need-for-lgbtqi-nursing-homes-1.2897095#.WEiSwthAHAc.twitter

Sinn Fein says that there may be a need for specific lgbtqi nursing homes? Do you think this is a good idea?

Is that not discrimination?

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Why?

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/senator-asks-oireachtas-to-consider-the-need-for-lgbtqi-nursing-homes-1.2897095#.WEiSwthAHAc.twitter

Sinn Fein says that there may be a need for specific lgbtqi nursing homes? Do you think this is a good idea?

I am not sure that in reality LGBTI people would be discriminated against in a nursing home.
My experience of Nursing homes is that they look beyond what a person is or isn't and care for them equally.
However, humans do tend to like to be in the company of people they can relate to and for that reason it would be nice to have nursing homes that are geared up to meet the needs of the LGBTI community. Apart from perhaps Dublin, it's hard to see where you would have enough demand for a dedicated LGBTI nursing home. People tend to choose nursing homes that are close to family members.
Ultimately Nursing homes should cater for everyone. My father is in a Nursing Home with a very religious ethos. He happens to be totally Atheist and the staff there are brilliant and he never feels that religion is being pushed on him at all. He is accepted by everyone there.
A better question to address would be, What are the needs of an elderly LGBTI person? It's a new phenomenon really in Ireland and a lot more research needs to be done to understand their needs and how this differs from any other person's needs in a Nursing Home.

Ten of Swords

Deleted User wrote: »

it's hard to see where you would have enough demand for a dedicated LGBTI nursing home. People tend to choose nursing homes that are close to family members.

There is unlikely to be sufficient demand now, the issue is that there may be a demand in the next few decades. As more gay/bi people are living their lives out the ageing 'out' gay population will naturally increase over time.

Most people currently reaching the age where they may need a nursing home will have lived the bulk of their lives in a different generation where there was very little/no opportunity to live as an openly gay person. Don't forget that homosexuality was only decriminalized 24 years ago.

However, the argument for this kind of rests on there still being similar levels of discrimination in the future which I would hope there won't be.

rdavey14

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Why?

If someone set up an only hetro anything there would be uproar. I'm not saying no the the idea I'm just stating that is is discrimination. Or if lgbtqi people were only allowed to be in certain nursing homes, they would get annoyed at not been able to be with everyone else

Ten of Swords

rdavey14 wrote: »

If someone set up an only hetro anything there would be uproar. I'm not saying no the the idea I'm just stating that is is discrimination. Or if lgbtqi people were only allowed to be in certain nursing homes, they would get annoyed at not been able to be with everyone else

Is this a serious post? Really? I can't quite decide.

Are straight people barred from the George? No of course not, but the venue is not specifically aimed at that demographic.

The idea that heterosexual people would be banned from a nursing home geared towards LGBT people is ridiculous, as is your assertion that gay/bi people wouldn't be able to go to a 'straight' nursing home.

Annasopra

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Why?

The current older lgbti population have gone through many phases in their life. An opressive religious heteronormative cisnormative culture dominated the political, education and health fields. In the areas of law their identities were illegal and denied. (Gay male sex decriminalised, 1993, gender recognition and marriage equality 2015). They could often be arrested for engaging in sexual acts and seriously discriminated in the workplace. Often this meant they ended up in poverty (see glen/nexus 1995 research).

As they now age they face many current difficulties;
* social isolation - they are more likely to live alone, be single and have no children then their heterosexual counterparts, their social circles of their lgbti peers
* service discrimination - they did in the 2011 survey report quite a lot of discrimination because they were lgbti in health and social services,
* age discrimination mixed in with homophobia and transphobia in social and health care services that sees older people as either a) universally non sexual with no identity or b) universally heterosexual and/or cisgender. The glen 2011 did not provide direct evidence of that in Ireland but there is lots of evidence internationally this is the case (Northern Ireland, UK, USA, South Africa, Canada, Australia) plus the fact that so many of our health and social care services are delivered within a religious ethos.

So looking at all that context where they have grown up with many difficulties in their lives; opression, life identities being villified, abused, illegal and marginalised and where they now face different lifecourse issues to do with aging perhaps it might be a good idea.

Annasopra

Deleted User wrote: »

I am not sure that in reality LGBTI people would be discriminated against in a nursing home.

The adacemic peer reviewed research generally shows they are;

Assumptions of non sexuality of residents
Assumptions of heterosexual/cisgender identity
Refusal to acknowledge partners at all - not letting them visit or stay over
Abuse/Intolerance from other residents
Abuse/Intoletance from other staff
Religious cultures ignoring/sidelining all acknowledgemeny of sexual identity
Culture of silence/secrecy on lgbt issues forcing people to go back into closet
Staff untrained/unaware how to deal with residents

Annasopra

I'm not for or against the idea personally. I think Fintan Warfield is right it needs discussion and debate.

The alternatives are home care and no specialised lgbt nursing homes. Both of these probably need a lot more training of employees in the health and social care sector.

rdavey14

Ten of Swords wrote: »

Is this a serious post? Really? I can't quite decide.

Are straight people barred from the George? No of course not, but the venue is not specifically aimed at that demographic.

The idea that heterosexual people would be banned from a nursing home geared towards LGBT people is ridiculous, as is your assertion that gay/bi people wouldn't be able to go to a 'straight' nursing home.

I'm not saying no to the idea and I'm not against lgbtqi People at all, I'm just stating that if they did open a lgbtqi nursing home, why is that not discrimination against both straight and lgbtqi? straight people are not allowed in and lgbtqi people are being just pushed out in their own nursing home. It's like America in the 50's having colored and white schools

Annasopra

rdavey14 wrote: »

I'm not saying no to the idea and I'm not against lgbtqi People at all, I'm just stating that if they did open a lgbtqi nursing home, why is that not discrimination against both straight and lgbtqi? straight people are not allowed in and lgbtqi people are being just pushed out in their own nursing home. It's like America in the 50's having colored and white schools

No.

Noone is saying suggesting banning straight people at all. Just like straight people are not banned from gay bars. This would be an option for lgbti people to choose. Noone is suggesting lgbti people could only goto lgbti specific nursing homes and there would be no other choice for them. There is comparison at all to state enforced segregated schools on America. This is not forced on people. This is not forced by that state. Noone is banned. It is ONLY a suggested choice and option.

Ten of Swords

rdavey14 wrote: »

I'm not saying no to the idea and I'm not against lgbtqi People at all, I'm just stating that if they did open a lgbtqi nursing home, why is that not discrimination against both straight and lgbtqi? straight people are not allowed in and lgbtqi people are being just pushed out in their own nursing home. It's like America in the 50's having colored and white schools

Because the section I have marked bold is completely untrue and would never happen.

The fact is this is not a significant issue now but as time goes on it will become a bigger and more important issue for many people so it's a good idea to have the conversations now or in the near future. The government is normally woefully reactive, I guess a bit of forward thinking for a change is a good thing even if this concept is unlikely to gain any traction. Having a nursing home that has a care program mindful of the needs of LGBT residents is not discrimination in any form, heterosexual residents would be welcomed too if they wished.

Your posts demonstrate extremely binary thinking on this issue, can I ask what your reasoning is for immediately calling out discrimination here?

rdavey14

Ten of Swords wrote: »

Your posts demonstrate extremely binary thinking on this issue, can I ask what your reasoning is for immediately calling out discrimination here?

I have called it discrimination as it seems to be separating two groups of people , where they could all be together. Realistically will many straight people go to lgbt nursing homes , no . If they did it would be the exact same situation , nobody would get anywhere.

I'm not exhibiting binary thinking on the issue but I'm am being realistic and unbiased.

From a previous post about straight people going to the George , that is like talking about teenagers going to mens sheds where they are mostly middle aged. It would be extremely rare for that to happen.

If straight people were a part of lgbqi nursing homes sure is it not the same thing .

Annasopra

rdavey14 wrote: »

I have called it discrimination as it seems to be separating two groups of people , where they could all be together. Realistically will many straight people go to lgbt nursing homes , no . If they did it would be the exact same situation , nobody would get anywhere.

I'm not exhibiting binary thinking on the issue but I'm am being realistic and unbiased.

From a previous post about straight people going to the George , that is like talking about teenagers going to mens sheds where they are mostly middle aged. It would be extremely rare for that to happen.

If straight people were a part of lgbqi nursing homes sure is it not the same thing .

But it's not discrimination. Noone is suggesting banning anyone at all.

Straight people often goto the george!

L1011

Fintan Warfield has some very strange ideas...

eviltwin

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

But it's not discrimination. Noone is suggesting banning anyone at all.

Straight people often goto the george!

The thread title is lgbt only...that would suggest no straight people.

Annasopra

eviltwin wrote: »

The thread title is lgbt only...that would suggest no straight people.

it doesnt suggest banning!!!

eviltwin

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

it doesnt suggest banning!!!

I took it that lgbt only would mean exclusively for lgbt people.

lottpaul

L1011 wrote: »

Fintan Warfield has some very strange ideas...

He may well have, on a variety of topics for all I know, but from reading the IT extract his main suggestion re this topic is for "sensitive and respectful" nursing home accomodation for elderly people from different backgrounds.

I'm glad he has brought this up for discussion at an official level. The needs of older LGBTQI folk in general need to be addressed.
Hospitals, nursing homes, HSE, medical providers, care givers etc all need to be conscious of the different sensitivities of an older person who will probably have spent most of their younger -and middle-aged - days firmly in the closet.


Among the things that would matter to me if I needed a nursing home is that I would be treated equally to everyone else, that I would be as free as other residents to talk about my loved ones, that my identity would be as respected as much as that of any other resident, that management and staff would be trained in the care of people with different identities and in guarding against homophobia, transphobia and so on from other residents, visitors and staff.
I would like to be cared for and valued as an individual.
I would expect to be allowed be the person I am, for as long as I can be, to remember the person I was and to remember the person I loved.
I would expect this as a right, not a privilege or a concession that could be withdrawn at some point.
If both of us needed care in a nursing home I would expect that we be treated as other couples are (though that's an issue in itself).

Awareness is part of the battle and discussions like this help to increase that.

Annasopra

eviltwin wrote: »

I took it that lgbt only would mean exclusively for lgbt people.

Thread title edited to clear up confusion

baby and crumble

Add to the fact that in some cases straight married couples aren't even allowed to share rooms in nursing homes, I think the sector has a long way to go to be considered really personalised.

I have a huge problem with nursing home and elder care in general in Ireland but that's a thread for another day.

jameorahiely

lottpaul wrote: »

He may well have, on a variety of topics for all I know, but from reading the IT extract his main suggestion re this topic is for "sensitive and respectful" nursing home accomodation for elderly people from different backgrounds.

I'm glad he has brought this up for discussion at an official level. The needs of older LGBTQI folk in general need to be addressed.
Hospitals, nursing homes, HSE, medical providers, care givers etc all need to be conscious of the different sensitivities of an older person who will probably have spent most of their younger -and middle-aged - days firmly in the closet.


Among the things that would matter to me if I needed a nursing home is that I would be treated equally to everyone else, that I would be as free as other residents to talk about my loved ones, that my identity would be as respected as much as that of any other resident, that management and staff would be trained in the care of people with different identities and in guarding against homophobia, transphobia and so on from other residents, visitors and staff.
I would like to be cared for and valued as an individual.
I would expect to be allowed be the person I am, for as long as I can be, to remember the person I was and to remember the person I loved.
I would expect this as a right, not a privilege or a concession that could be withdrawn at some point.
If both of us needed care in a nursing home I would expect that we be treated as other couples are (though that's an issue in itself).

Awareness is part of the battle and discussions like this help to increase that.

Why do you have the opinion that care givers are unprofessional and don't treat and care for everyone as an individual? How did you come to that conclusion?

lottpaul

jameorahiely wrote: »

Why do you have the opinion that care givers are unprofessional and don't treat and care for everyone as an individual? How did you come to that conclusion?

I don't know where you drew that conclusion from, but as a general principle I would expect that all people whose jobs involve caring for vulnerable people, of any age and in any situation, be it nursing home, hospital or the family home would have ongoing and continuous in-service training and upskilling to enable them to better deal with new and changing circumstances.
I hope no professional, much less one involved in the care of people would go through a 30 or 40 year career and receive no inservice training?

As Baby and crumble says however these may be matters for a wider discussion at another time.

jameorahiely

lottpaul wrote: »

I don't know where you drew that conclusion from, but as a general principle I would expect that all people whose jobs involve caring for vulnerable people, of any age and in any situation, be it nursing home, hospital or the family home would have ongoing and continuous in-service training and upskilling to enable them to better deal with new and changing circumstances.
I hope no professional, much less one involved in the care of people would go through a 30 or 40 year career and receive no inservice training?

As Baby and crumble says however these may be matters for a wider discussion at another time.

I drew that conclusion from you saying:

Among the things that would matter to me if I needed a nursing home is that I would be treated equally to everyone else, that I would be as free as other residents to talk about my loved ones, that my identity would be as respected as much as that of any other resident, that management and staff would be trained in the care of people with different identities and in guarding against homophobia, transphobia and so on from other residents, visitors and staff.
I would like to be cared for and valued as an individual.
I would expect to be allowed be the person I am, for as long as I can be, to remember the person I was and to remember the person I loved.

This suggests you believe this is not already the case, as you are using it as a reason lgbt nursing homes are necessary.

Annasopra

jameorahiely wrote: »

I drew that conclusion from you saying:

This suggests you believe this is not already the case, as you are using it as a reason lgbt nursing homes are necessary.

Where did Lottpaul say that LGBT nursing homes are necessary. Or that that care givers are unprofessional and don't treat and care for everyone as an individual? You seem to be reading things into the posts that are not there.

jameorahiely

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Where did Lottpaul say that LGBT nursing homes are necessary. Or that that care givers are unprofessional and don't treat and care for everyone as an individual? You seem to be reading things into the posts that are not there.

Well i'm curious then, what additional needs over and above what is already catered for, is it envisonage lgbt people having?

Annasopra

jameorahiely wrote: »

Well i'm curious then, what additional needs over and above what is already catered for, is it envisonage lgbt people having?

I think I answered some of the specific issues/needs currently facing Irish older LGBT people here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101914162&postcount=8

Lottpaul stated from his personal point of view what he would want in a long term care setting. He didnt a) suggest that that long term care setting has to be specific to LGBT people and he didn't b) suggest that all care givers are unprofessional and don't treat and care for everyone as an individual - he stated what he would want/require.

I really don't think what he suggested at all is too much to ask for. Basically dignity, respect and recognition.

If I had to go into a long term care setting I would want similar to what Lottpaul suggested. I probably would want to live in a place inclusive of all and not LGBT specific.

I would like to be treated with respect and dignity, I would like to be as free as other residents to talk about my loved ones or friends whoever they are, I would want my identity to be respected as much as that of any other resident, ideally management and staff would be trained in inclusivity in caring for people with different identities and in guarding against homophobia, transphobia and other discriminations from other residents, visitors and staff.
I would like to be cared for and valued as an individual.
I would expect to be allowed be the person I am, for as long as I can be, to remember the person I was and to remember the people I loved openly.
I would expect this as a right, not a privilege or a concession that could be withdrawn at some point.
If I had a partner and I was in care but he wasn't or vice versa I would expect to be able to visit and stay if we both wanted. I would expect the nursing home to respect both of us and our relationship.
If both of us needed care in a nursing home I would expect that we be treated as other couples are.

The 2011 Glen research didnt go indepth into Long Term Care in Ireland as most of those surveyed were not living in long term care but it show older LGBT people have many fears and anxieties about going into Nursing homes. Research internationally from Northern Ireland, UK, USA, South Africa suggests Long term care settings for older people are not very inclusive places, they can often treat LGBT older people disdainfully and disrepectfully, effectively force many older people back into the closet because the culture can be one of a silent "not discussing that", the attitude of staff and other residents can often be quite discriminatory, they can name LGBT inclusive policies but not actually put them into practice and they can often treat all older people the same.

baby and crumble

jameorahiely wrote: »

Why do you have the opinion that care givers are unprofessional and don't treat and care for everyone as an individual? How did you come to that conclusion?

While the majority of care staff are very good at their jobs, and can provide basic care, the simple fact is that many healthcare settings have no clue how to handle LGBTQ patients- this extends to GPs who don't understand the specific health needs of trans and LGB patients, nurses who assume that your other half is of the opposite gender, etc.

The assumption is ALWAYS that you are straight until you inform people otherwise. Imagine now, being a 78 year old gay man who has a slight form of dementia, and gets confused easily. You have care staff who assume he is straight, and asks him about his wife.

Imagine being a butch identified woman whose care staff assume you will want to wear dresses and have your nails painted as an "activity" in the home.

If you have the choice to access an LGBTQ facility when the time comes (remember that certainly currently those reaching residential care age are most likely not married and don't have children to assist them in this) I think it's only a good thing. It's not about forcing people into nursing home "ghettos", it's about providing choice.

seamus

baby and crumble wrote: »

The assumption is ALWAYS that you are straight until you inform people otherwise. Imagine now, being a 78 year old gay man who has a slight form of dementia, and gets confused easily. You have care staff who assume he is straight, and asks him about his wife.

Imagine being a butch identified woman whose care staff assume you will want to wear dresses and have your nails painted as an "activity" in the home.

I had initially thought from the headline, "what's the point", but this does actually make a lot of sense.
There's nothing inherently wrong in making an assumption that a person is straight - most people are - but in a situation where the patient may not be able to speak up for themselves it makes a whole lot of sense to place them somewhere that is sensitive to their needs.

Trans people in particular could find the nursing home experience incredibly stressful if they only have access to staff who assume their gender, or even worse refuse to recognise it.

I'm sure for the most part care staff would be sensitive to these things, but only when it's brought to their attention. And people end up in nursing homes precisely because they lack this ability.

baby and crumble

seamus wrote: »

I'm sure for the most part care staff would be sensitive to these things, but only when it's brought to their attention. And people end up in nursing homes precisely because they lack this ability.

For the most part, yes. But there will be lots of care staff who won't. You cannot deify care staff. Trust me, I've worked as a care staff and there are a hell of a lot who make jokes about those they are caring for, and who are in the job simply because it's long been an easy enough job to get into, because the turn over is so high. If you are unemployed you will at some point be invited to undertake training as a social care worker (along with hairdresser and possibly computers). That's why having a safe, open home for specific groups where they can be as assured as possible that their way of living will be respected is crucial.

Annasopra

seamus wrote: »

I had initially thought from the headline, "what's the point", but this does actually make a lot of sense.
There's nothing inherently wrong in making an assumption that a person is straight - most people are - but in a situation where the patient may not be able to speak up for themselves it makes a whole lot of sense to place them somewhere that is sensitive to their needs.

Trans people in particular could find the nursing home experience incredibly stressful if they only have access to staff who assume their gender, or even worse refuse to recognise it.

I'm sure for the most part care staff would be sensitive to these things, but only when it's brought to their attention. And people end up in nursing homes precisely because they lack this ability.

And the staff might be fine but other residents might be very unfriendly and/or extremely hostile.

Ten of Swords

Article in the Independent today, good read.

LGBTI couple on challenge of early-stage Alzheimers

wheresthebeef

As a gay man and as someone who is at a senior level in the nursing home industry, I can completely understand the need for services that take account of the needs of LGBTQ residents. I have cared for a gay resident in a previous employment and whilst I think that gentleman had a very positive, open and supportive experience with us, I would imagine that it would not be consistent across all care providers in the sector.

There are a number of issues surrounding staff understanding and cultural awareness (particularly as many staff in this sector are from different cultures where homosexuality is not as well tolerated) and more challenging would be issues about other residents. The building blocks need to start being built now to ensure that all LGBT people have access to safe, person centered services that respect their values and meet their needs.

SILVAMAN

Deleted User wrote: »

I am not sure that in reality LGBTI people would be discriminated against in a nursing home.

A better question to address would be, What are the needs of an elderly LGBTI person? It's a new phenomenon really in Ireland and a lot more research needs to be done to understand their needs and how this differs from any other person's needs in a Nursing Home.

You don't have to scratch too deeply on the surface of liberal Ireland to find prejudice or a simple lack of understanding of LGBT issues. Not surprising I guess.
I was at a dinner party with a well known lawyer-early 50's woman, smart and at the top of her legal ares of expertise, liberal by any yardstick, one would assume, except that she could not bring herself to say the word "gay"...it seemed as though she might just choke if she attempted to say it. She referred to"homosexuals" , and she referred to certain people who she knew were "homosexuals", and spoke of them as though they were creatures to be pitied and observed from a safe distance.
However the younger generation from early 20s down are used to the reality of sexuality and it won't bother them.
So there is a need for LGBT nursing homes/retirement communities and it's common in the US
http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/on-retirement/articles/2016-11-03/20-retirement-communities-for-lgbt-seniors or in the UK http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/09/18/britain-to-get-first-ever-lgbt-retirement-home/
And imagine the difference in decor...pastel shades instead of institutional green and NO WIRE HANGERS!

Ten of Swords

Silvaman, good read about the US communities. I was surprised there are none in the UK yet but at least it's being looked at and will be worked on, I have a feeling this will stay on the drawing board in Ireland for years to come

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

And the staff might be fine but other residents might be very unfriendly and/or extremely hostile.

Yes, this recent article for example details the appalling harassment a woman suffered at the hands of her fellow residents in her retirement community.

SILVAMAN

Ten of Swords wrote: »

Yes, this recent article for example details the appalling harassment a woman suffered at the hands of her fellow residents in her retirement community.

Unfortunate lady. I just want to go there and put my arms around her and tell her it will be ok. Did she ever think it would come to this? It certainly is sobering.
The USA led the world in the fight for gay rights and this area of LGBT experience is just a logical extension of that.
Here's another link to that story http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/your-money/lgbt-senior-housing-case-fight-bias.html?_r=0

Annasopra

That story is quite common. I've read a good few similar stories from UK, US even Netherlands.

lottpaul

Ten of Swords wrote: »

Yes, this recent article for example details the appalling harassment a woman suffered at the hands of her fellow residents in her retirement community.

That story is very sad and is clearly an example of a patient not being adequately protected by the management/staff of a nursing home. She does say that it's a minority of residents who are harassing her, but that doesn't excuse anyone involved. I'm also not sure if there's a relevance in the fact that the facility cares for those who are on lower income (according to the NY Times article) but it may explain the attitude of "if you don't like it here, move out" that seems to be coming from the management.
I hope she's successful in her lawsuit and manages to change the attitude and behaviour of those who run the home.
As for the residents who are threatening and bullying her, perhaps the threat of a similar lawsuit might dampen their hatred a little.

On the more human level the photo of a frail old woman, alone in a spartan little room is heartbreaking - and she's only 69 She's poor, and vulnerable, but she has the spirit for a fight. Good for her!

Makes you wonder though if there are Irish people in nursing homes waking up to a similar situation this morning.

CalamariFritti

I'm not sure this is a good idea. Having special facilities for LGBT people is grand as long as its genuinely meant to overcome discrimination. Generally speaking though, if we want to get away from the idea that our sexual orientation is what defines us above all and if we want things to be 'normal' for LGBT people I think we really have to get away from the special treatment route and simply let LGBT people live their lives and not continuously find differences for them.

I assume there are still a lot of challenges for LGBT people fair enough but as a hetero who doesn't have a problem with any aspect of LGBT'ness I'm growing tired of their (perceived) constant need for specialness.

baby and crumble

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I assume there are still a lot of challenges for LGBT people fair enough but as a hetero who doesn't have a problem with any aspect of LGBT'ness I'm growing tired of their (perceived) constant need for specialness.

I don't mean to be rude but just as I don't know what it's like to be straight (and therefore don't have to watch my back walking down the street in case I get homophobic abuse yelled at me) you have no idea what the experiences are of older LGBT inidividuals.

I'm so sorry that our "constant need for specialness" (read: need for protection and understanding of difference) annoys you.

CalamariFritti

What I'm saying do we as a society continue to focus on the differences? In my layman's mind I thought the ultimate form of tolerance, acceptance and normality is when nobody actually gives a toss? No?

baby and crumble

CalamariFritti wrote: »

What I'm saying do we as a society continue to focus on the differences? In my layman's mind I thought the ultimate form of tolerance, acceptance and normality is when nobody actually gives a toss? No?

For many people, yes that is the best possible outcome, but "not giving a toss" often means treating everyone the exact same- that is, being blind to difference and different needs can often LOOK like the ultimate in "tolerance" but it's actually more damaging.

Look at the language you've used- "tolerance, acceptance, normality"; I don't want to be "tolerated" for being a lesbian. Why is "normal" always seen as the best way to be?

I am a lesbian. I love women. When I am on old woman I will still be attracted to women, and that will never change (probably). My experience as a lesbian has shaped who I am, and try as hard as you will, if my experienced is presumed to be the same as a straight persons, it will likely erase some of my experience. You speak like difference is a bad thing. It's not, not at all.

I'm not saying I think LGBT people need to be treated massively differently to straight folks. I just think that there needs to be spaces where who we are will not just be "accepted" and "tolerated" but will be celebrated. We're still a long, long way off from that. People get uncomfortable when LGBT information is included in the same spaces as straight information- for example as poor as our sex education is in schools it's 10 times worse for a young gay or bisexual kid. Ok, no-one is going to freak out and try and convert you here, but a young gay man not knowing that there are different types of condoms for anal use, or a young lesbian thinking she doesn't need to have regular smear tests because she's never slept with a man is just as damaging. Adults will slag off their teenaged kids or their friends kids for having a boyfriend or having a crush, but won't do the same for a gay kid, even if they are out because they're not sure if it's acceptable.

SILVAMAN

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I'm not sure this is a good idea. Having special facilities for LGBT people is grand as long as its genuinely meant to overcome discrimination. Generally speaking though, if we want to get away from the idea that our sexual orientation is what defines us above all and if we want things to be 'normal' for LGBT people I think we really have to get away from the special treatment route and simply let LGBT people live their lives and not continuously find differences for them.

I assume there are still a lot of challenges for LGBT people fair enough but as a hetero who doesn't have a problem with any aspect of LGBT'ness I'm growing tired of their (perceived) constant need for specialness.

Can you read?

CalamariFritti

SILVAMAN wrote: »

Can you read?

Well clearly LGBT advocacy can be just as arrogant and berating and sarcastic as everyone else's. Well done to you.

baby and crumble

SILVAMAN wrote: »

Can you read?

There's no need to be rude, in fairness.

That goes for everyone on the thread, BTW. Just a friendly warning!

baby and crumble

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Well clearly LGBT advocacy can be just as arrogant and berating and sarcastic as everyone else's. Well done to you.

Can we stay on track, please?

CalamariFritti

Of course we can stay on track. Sorry.

Look it's actually hard to find language that doesn't p1ss someone off. When I say acceptance and tolerance you could twist it as in I don't want to be tolerated. And I get that. And it's not what I meant.
What I mean is you're you. Not your lesbian you. You're you who happens to be lesbian. That's grand maybe even interesting. But it's not that special that I have to mollycoddle you and make allowances for that here there and everywhere.
And isn't a status where it's just like the above what we ultimately strive for?

Annasopra

CalamariFritti wrote: »

What I'm saying do we as a society continue to focus on the differences? In my layman's mind I thought the ultimate form of tolerance, acceptance and normality is when nobody actually gives a toss? No?

I find this idea that we shouldnt acknowledge difference and diversity quite strange personally. I am a gay man. This means I am different. It means I have differing needs within society. I have differing social and relationship needs. Because I am a gay man I am more likely to smoke, drink, take drugs, have poor mental health, have higher sexual health risks. Therefore I also have differing healthcare needs.

Equality is not about treating everyone the same. If you treat everyone the exact same you are reinforcing inequality. Equality is about acknowledging and recognising difference and diversity and tailoring something to meet that need.

baby and crumble

CalamariFritti wrote: »

What I mean is you're you. Not your lesbian you. You're you who happens to be lesbian. That's grand maybe even interesting. But it's not that special that I have to mollycoddle you and make allowances for that here there and everywhere.

To be brutally honest, you cannot separate me from my sexuality, just like you can't separate yourself from yours. I also can't separate myself from being female, from being white, from being raised in a minority religion in this country... it all comes together to form our experiences. My experience will be radically different from a black male, or from a catholic woman, or whatever.

Nobody is asking to be mollycoddled here. I couldn't give a damn if you think my lesbianism is "interesting" (weird phrase, but ok). But just like your sexuality impacts on who you are and what you do, so does mine. I think perhaps you don't notice that about yourself as much (I'm using "you" here to refer to people in general) because society is set up so that your sexuality, and what comes from it, is seem as the norm.

The clothes you wear, the way you style your hair, whether you have a beard, whether you wear makeup, the way you speak to people, all that comes from your sexuality, in some way. I'm not saying everything we do as individuals comes from sexuality, but it's a huge part of who we are as humans and animals.

Getting back to the initial point of the thread- for years nobody thought about older LGBT folks needing an accepting nursing home environment because nobody thought about LGBT peoples needs, full stop. However, when I am old and may need a nursing home, I want one where the staff won't assume I'm straight (which is the assumption of most people, everywhere, just based on the law of averages which is fair enough!), where they won't try and put me in dresses, or paint my hairs, or put makeup on me if I'm not able to state my own wishes. If that can happen in any nursing home that exists, then brilliant. But right now all the evidence shows that that's not happening, that social care staff feel overwhelmed by providing this kind of diverse environment for LGBT seniors, and that it's a problem. Surely we should fix a problem that exists, whether we want it to or not?

Annasopra

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Of course we can stay on track. Sorry.

Look it's actually hard to find language that doesn't p1ss someone off. When I say acceptance and tolerance you could twist it as in I don't want to be tolerated. And I get that. And it's not what I meant.
What I mean is you're you. Not your lesbian you. You're you who happens to be lesbian. That's grand maybe even interesting. But it's not that special that I have to mollycoddle you and make allowances for that here there and everywhere.
And isn't a status where it's just like the above what we ultimately strive for?

Nobody is asking to be mollycoddled at all. Or special "allowances". Just to be treated respectfully. And that means respecting our identities.