#I have been targeted and assaulted by men for being openly and obviously queer and unapologetic about it

[petluck]

some of you "leftists" will see a dude suffering mentally and physically under capitalism and be like "mmm should've introspected harder or maybe tried not being born bad and irredeemable" and call that praxis

[musingsofacollegejunior]

Blogpost #3, 8/31/2018

Perhaps one of the most widely-known, widespread discourse communities of today is the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender (LGBT) community. Having an extensive, densely-packed history with no shortage of bumps in the road, it remains my best example of a discourse community.

First, let’s explore why the LGBT movement constitutes a discourse community. According to writer and linguist John Swales, for a group to qualify as a discourse community, it must meet six certain requirements. The first requirement is that the group must possess a broadly agreed-upon set of common goals. Any LGBT person will tell you that the purpose of the community is to build a sense of togetherness, comradery, to culminate a place of acceptance, and to promote equality and social justice. I have never met a single LGBT person that does not strive to reach any of the objectives listed here. The community is centered around tolerance and equality, and anything that threatens those objectives has no place anywhere inside the community.

The second requirement of a discourse community is that it must have mechanisms of intercommunication between its members. The LGBT community is worldwide; there is no central location or headquarters. Because of this, there are several international as well as local ways for LGBT folks to interact. Since the community is so widespread, the best way for us to interact is through the Internet. This is a broad concept; we interact through social media, mostly microblogging websites such as Tumblr, or discussion forums specifically designated for LGBT-related topics. This allows for (mostly) thoughtful, constructive discourse between members of differing backgrounds. The Internet can also be useful to organize local and even international meetups; in fact, this is the primary way that modern Pride celebrations are organized. Because of this connection to each other through the Internet, we are able to form physical organizations in the “real world” and further our goals through face-to-face interactions.

Swales’ third qualification of a discourse community is that it must primarily use its participatory mechanisms to provide information and feedback. Again, this can be defined in terms of the LGBT community in a number of ways. For example, let’s revisit the concept of Pride celebrations. A large portion of LGBT folks are able to attend their local Pride parade each summer, and turnout for most parades is typically significant. This allows for interactions between thousands of people with at least one thing in common. Many Pride-goers use social media to communicate their thoughts on the festivities, how well it may have been organized, what things the organizers could improve on, etc. As a result of this feedback, the organizers of the celebration are able to reflect on their coordination of the event, and how they can improve it down the road. 

The fourth characteristic of a discourse community is that it must utilize and possess one or more genres to further communication. In this case, the “genres” of the LGBT community are the groups that the moniker stands for and how they “articulate the operations” of the discourse community, as Swales says. Each group within the group - lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender - has its own meaning as a member of the greater LGBT community. For example, bisexual and transgender individuals have long felt uneasy in LGBT spaces. There is a discrimination within the community itself regarding the two groups; some gays and lesbians view bisexuals as flaky, indecisive or attention-seeking, and thus should not be considered LGBT. There is also an animosity towards transgender individuals within the community, with many gays, lesbians and bisexuals secretly harboring transphobic views. Many discussion forums, panels, and well-known LGBT figures have touched on the subject of bisexual and transgender exclusion, and thus meets the requirement for having more than one genre.

The fifth qualifying factor of a discourse community is that it acquires its own specific lexis, or terminology. As with any group, the LGBT community does have its own special brand of terminology that non-LGBT folks might not possess. For instance, the stereotypical “gay lisp” or higher-pitched voice is unique to gay cisgender men. This is a phenomenon that is not fully understood, even within the LGBT community, but it exists to that one specific group. Popular among the younger LGBT crowds is the reclaiming of slurs - words once used to discriminate against and harass LGBT individuals that we now use to describe ourselves. The most common instance of this is the usage of the word “queer”. Though it is still sometimes thrown around with ill intentions, many LGBT people consider it empowering to reclaim a word that was once only used to spew hatred. This can be said about other words, such as “fag”, “dyke”, “homo”, etc., but “queer” is the most commonplace. There is discourse within the LGBT community about its appropriacy, but it is largely considered acceptable if one is reclaiming the word for themselves in the name of empowerment.

The final component of a discourse community is that its members must hold similar degrees of relevant content and discoursal experience. Most, if not all LGBT people have experienced discrimination in one form or another, giving just about everyone some experience to speak on. I can personally guarantee that most LGBT individuals have received negative comments at least once, and a fair portion have experienced physical violence. Myself and my close friends have been the target of hateful comments, and two of these friends have been physically assaulted for being LGBT. Unfortunately, this is all too common, even in today’s more accepting world. Because so many LGBT folks experience discrimination, I’m fairly confident in saying that they possess enough expertise to discuss and criticize LGBT-related topics. 

The artifact I have chosen to represent the LGBT community is one that is widely considered among numerous groups to be a pivotal piece of history in the history of the LGBT movement: the riots at the Stonewall Inn gay bar in 1969. This series of violent demonstrations that took place in response to police raids was a catalyst in the push for equal rights in the USA. Before analyzing the riots, we first need to describe why it can be considered an artifact in the first place. If we’re to abide by Barry Brummett’s definition, something must meet three criteria to be considered an artifact. It must be:

                      1. A situation, object or event perceived as a unified whole,

                      2. In possession of widely shared meanings,

                      3. Manifesting group identifications.

(photo credit: The Evolution of NYC)

The riots are certainly an event of a unified whole; though they began in the name of a greater need, they were unprecedented in terms of the number of people participating, the level of violence, and their length. They had a widely shared meaning; to get the conversation started about equal rights in a non-conventional way. And they manifested group identifications; gathering and uniting as LGBT in physical locations was a largely underground concept until the Stonewall riots, after which the push for equal rights increased and it slowly became more acceptable to be openly LGBT. Most LGBT individuals consider the riots a substantial portion of their identity, as we give it credit as being the reason why we have (mostly) equal rights today. 

The major message of the Stonewall riots was clear. At the time of the event, in late 1960′s America, it signified that this minority was no longer going to sit idly by and be discriminated and oppressed. The exigencies of the riots were that LGBT folk were unfair targets of police and civilians alike, which in many cases led to muggings, murder and other acts of violence. In addition, the LGBT were facing an anti-gay legal system and it was extremely difficult to seek justice for hate crimes and other forms of discrimination. The audiences of the riots proved to be just about everyone as it was a major event; it communicated to LGBT people worldwide, the anti-gay establishment in the U.S., bigoted civilians, and the USA as a whole. Obviously, there were several constraints, once again including anti-LGBT authority figures, commonplace bigotry, the laws of the time period, and frequent police raids of known LGBT meeting places. 

Therefore, because the LGBT community meets all six of Swales’ criteria and the Stonewall riots qualify as its major artifact, it is reasonable to say that LGBT is, in fact, a discourse community.