edit: I was wrong in this post. not because breeder is offenisve to cishet white people, but because the term is anti-black, oppressive to black women in particular, biphobic, cissexist, and exclusionary to many people in the lgbtqia+ community. i apologize for using this word and advocating and defending it’s use in the past more info about why it’s bad here: http://mamamantis.tumblr.com/post/40115020517/withlovethelavendermenace-it-makes-me-really



So for some reason I was looking up opinions people had re: queer people using the term “breeders” for straight people. There’s a surprisingly large number who find it offensive. In this article, Solomon, a (queer) author, argues that the word is offensive because, she says, it’s harmful. She even argues it can be misogynistic due to assumptions about women as baby makers (I don’t think anyone ever takes breeder that way. It’s a gender neutral term, for one thing; usually used in the plural). But worst yet, she compares it to slurs (toward gay people and racial minorities) and shares her experiences of being called a cracker as if that’s on par with being a racial minority and called an epithet. I mean, I can’t deny that being bullied or insulted hurts no matter what. And I can’t deny her experiences, but I get sick of these white people saying, “poor me, I was a white kid in a nonwhite neighborhood and I was bullied” when they imply it was as bad as the other way around. When it’s not. Because while bullying is wrong should be opposed no matter what, I would hope we can agree that when a kid is bullied for having a bad haircut or any other reason that doesn’t involve being the member of an oppressed group, it’s not the same as when a gay kid or black kid is bullied for being gay or black (or in some cases, both). When the white kid or nerdy kid is bullied for being white or nerdy (or both), their experience is not reinforced by a whole bunch of economic, social and political forces in the world bent on oppressing them. And this is a big problem with Solomon’s argument: it’s false equivocating.

Because she is making a false comparison, I think she misunderstands the source of offense straight people feel when called “breeders.” I remember when I first encountered the word as a term used by gay people for straight people. It made me feel very weird and uncomfortable, and I have to admit, initially offended. At the time, I thought I was straight and it burst my bubble to experience gay people (a sexual minority) creating a language to refer to my (alleged) heterosexuality in a limiting and less than favorable light. Straight culture does this to gay people, homosexuality and queerness constantly. Gay people are reduced to sex-crazed caricatures or comedic stereotypes. Terms like “fairy” or “dyke” in straight mouths are meant not only to insult but to delimit. The gay man is a prancing, effeminate joke. The lesbian a butch and undesirable man-woman. The very term “homosexual” coined by straight people, denoted a sickness, which has led to the suffering and deaths of many people. Much of the language straight people use for queer people is meant to demonize and denigrate our sexualities.



Breeder does not have this power. It never will have this power. But it has a little power in that it alters the prevailing discourse, even if slightly. Suddenly, the heterocentric bubble in which many straight people perceive heterosexuality in all things and as a superior sexuality containing layers of complexity and romance and social integrity, is burst. Suddenly, heterosexuality, if only for a moment, is (often jokingly and with tongue in cheek) reduced, like gayness is often reduced–in this case, to a utilitarian purpose. I think “breeder” can be best understood when compared to a misandrist joke. You won’t find a gay person who literally believes straight people only exist and only have sex to breed. Just like it’s hard to find a real woman who thinks men should always be outside mowing the lawn or cooking at a barbecue. But the joke points to what is happening when the reverse is done, the reverse which is much more inconspicuous, normative and harmful. Frequently and without pause, women’s roles are restricted and gay people and their experiences are reduced. That’s why terms like “breeder” and misandrist jokes are important: they highlight and deconstruct this phenomenon. And like “die cis scum” I think such discourse only offends privileged folk when they assume we are all on an equal playing field and all our words have equal power. Unfortunately, this is not so.