Queer-Related Language and How Privilege and Heteronormativity Have an Effect on Language Perception and Use
Jose Daniel Lino Plat
Author
09/17/2020
Added
293
Plays
Description
An online survey was used to determine the use and perceptions of queer-related terms by heteronormative and queer people. Research participants were primarily from the US, UK and Ireland. Research was conducted from a Queer Linguistics approach, discussing gender and queer theories as well. Results indicated that there was an existing relationship between privilege and heteronormativity and a distinguished usage and understanding of language, which was heightened when comparing heteronormative and queer participants. Privilege relations within in-group LGBTQ+ people were established, considering their gender and sexual identities separately. This study indicates additional research on other variants of participants’ identities, such as age or race/ethnicity to see how these identities intersect and affect their use of language.
Searchable Transcript
Toggle between list and paragraph view.
- [00:00:00.340]Hey, my name is Daniel Lino.
- [00:00:03.090]And I am in my second year of my master's degree
- [00:00:06.540]here at the Department of Modern Languages and Literatures
- [00:00:10.951]at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
- [00:00:15.821]So I am from Spain.
- [00:00:18.600]I did my bachelor's degree in English studies,
- [00:00:22.430]and this is my final degree project that I did.
- [00:00:27.230]And I'm going to talk to you about it today.
- [00:00:31.120]So sorry, I'm going to be talking about
- [00:00:35.640]queer-related language and how privilege
- [00:00:38.280]and heteronormativity have an effect
- [00:00:40.900]on language perception and use.
- [00:00:44.050]So what was the study about?
- [00:00:48.830]What did I do?
- [00:00:50.800]So for this study or for this research,
- [00:00:54.250]what I wanted to understand was if and how
- [00:00:59.225]the language and terminology that we use,
- [00:01:02.360]whether we belong to the LGBTQ plus community or not,
- [00:01:07.760]was linked to privilege and power
- [00:01:10.040]in relation to how much do we fit
- [00:01:12.360]into that heteronormative spectrum
- [00:01:15.868]in today's society.
- [00:01:18.120]So as I suspected, and I'm giving it away,
- [00:01:22.450]and so a spoiler alert.
- [00:01:24.850]I'm going to give you the conclusions that I found,
- [00:01:29.140]but we're going to dive a little bit more
- [00:01:32.363]into them in a minute at the end.
- [00:01:35.040]So I found out that there's, in fact,
- [00:01:38.900]an existing a relationship between privilege
- [00:01:42.122]and heteronormativity and the way we speak
- [00:01:45.830]and distinguish usage and understanding of language.
- [00:01:51.940]So I also saw that there's a high,
- [00:01:55.630]this relationship is heightened when we compare individuals
- [00:02:00.820]that are perceived or identified as,
- [00:02:04.643]or that fit within the heteronormative category
- [00:02:09.022]and participants that were within the LGBTQ plus
- [00:02:12.570]or queer community.
- [00:02:14.940]But also, it's important to know
- [00:02:17.513]that there's also privilege relations
- [00:02:21.715]within in-group LGBTQ plus people.
- [00:02:27.230]So we're going to be diving into these conclusions
- [00:02:31.970]and see how I got to those.
- [00:02:36.771]Okay, so basically what I did
- [00:02:39.800]so that you have a little bit more of a background
- [00:02:42.820]into my situation.
- [00:02:45.650]I really wanted to conduct this survey,
- [00:02:51.100]but my resources were limited at the time.
- [00:02:55.030]So I did not have straight access
- [00:02:59.470]into English native speakers.
- [00:03:03.950]So my only way of doing this was to put out
- [00:03:08.580]an online-based survey online and distributing that
- [00:03:15.380]among Facebook groups and friends that I had.
- [00:03:20.910]So I was basically trying to spread this survey
- [00:03:26.240]as much as I could.
- [00:03:27.880]So in the end, I got also for the survey
- [00:03:33.050]was open to everyone,
- [00:03:34.350]whether they belong to the LGBTQ plus community,
- [00:03:37.730]or they identified as a heterosexual.
- [00:03:42.700]So in the end, the only condition
- [00:03:47.390]for this survey to complete that
- [00:03:49.240]and that was put as a disclaimer at the beginning
- [00:03:53.900]is that participants had to be English native speakers.
- [00:03:59.410]And in the end, I got 70 participants
- [00:04:03.030]but I could only count and those are the only ones
- [00:04:06.530]who are counted in the results.
- [00:04:10.700]I only counted 62 participants.
- [00:04:13.500]And this was due because I identified
- [00:04:17.670]that they were not native speakers of the language.
- [00:04:21.570]This was done by some questions regarding nationality,
- [00:04:28.300]place of birth, language spoken at the home.
- [00:04:33.800]So yes, this was only limited to native speakers.
- [00:04:39.720]So the participants that I got were primarily from the UK,
- [00:04:44.480]from the US and from Ireland, as you see in this graph.
- [00:04:49.290]Most people were from the US, 48.3%.
- [00:04:53.740]Then we have the UK, 28.3% of participants.
- [00:04:58.220]And then we have our Ireland, with 23.3%.
- [00:05:03.800]There's two participants who come from Australia.
- [00:05:07.560]And there's one participant who is a native,
- [00:05:11.290]who is an English native speaker,
- [00:05:13.600]but holds Polish nationality as well.
- [00:05:18.220]So even though the ages of participants
- [00:05:22.990]ranged between 18 and 30 years old,
- [00:05:27.600]oh, sorry, between 15 to 66 years old,
- [00:05:32.130]that was the whole range.
- [00:05:34.970]Most participants were between 18 and 30 old.
- [00:05:38.530]Which is also important to note given that
- [00:05:41.840]that might affect and I think it does in fact,
- [00:05:46.400]the results of this survey.
- [00:05:49.460]We will talk in the end about the limitations
- [00:05:52.680]of this research study as well.
- [00:05:57.200]So before we dive into the methodology
- [00:06:00.570]or the content of the survey,
- [00:06:03.600]I think it's important to know us a trigger warning
- [00:06:07.050]that I'm going to be dealing and showing
- [00:06:09.960]and talking about some terms that can be perceived
- [00:06:15.670]and are used nowadays, sadly, as slurs
- [00:06:20.410]against the LGBTQ plus community.
- [00:06:23.040]So just FYI.
- [00:06:26.010]So within the survey, there were 28 questions.
- [00:06:30.220]I know, a lot.
- [00:06:31.950]But I'm not going to dive or talk about
- [00:06:35.590]the actual 28 questions because that will be
- [00:06:38.250]a very long presentation,
- [00:06:41.290]but I'm going to divide the question into four main blocks.
- [00:06:49.410]And then I will briefly touch on some of them,
- [00:06:53.456]if I think that are relevant.
- [00:06:56.370]So these four blocks, the first one,
- [00:06:59.230]I was trying to find out the demographics,
- [00:07:01.980]who was responding to the survey.
- [00:07:08.180]So I was asking or inquiring about their age,
- [00:07:12.550]their nationality, their race or ethnic background,
- [00:07:16.060]their gender and sexual identity, etc.
- [00:07:19.330]As I was saying also, things like place of birth
- [00:07:24.770]or language spoken in the house, etc.
- [00:07:29.140]Then I was trying to inquire about how much knowledge
- [00:07:33.970]participants had on queer-related words.
- [00:07:37.140]So I was trying to see how much they knew about,
- [00:07:42.330]or how many, better said how many terms or words
- [00:07:47.710]they knew, or they were familiarized with.
- [00:07:50.900]Then I was asking about their perception
- [00:07:53.591]on some of these queer-related terms.
- [00:07:59.360]If they thought these words were positive or negative, etc.
- [00:08:04.290]And finally, I was introducing, you know,
- [00:08:08.120]giving a definition and talking a little bit
- [00:08:10.100]about linguistic reappropriation
- [00:08:13.020]or reclamation of these words,
- [00:08:15.000]which consists of
- [00:08:21.570]taking a word that has been traditionally used as a slur
- [00:08:25.470]or as an insult against the community
- [00:08:29.370]and taking that word within the community
- [00:08:32.880]and using it with a different, complete meaning.
- [00:08:37.520]So we'll talk a little bit about that
- [00:08:42.120]further into the presentation.
- [00:08:45.970]So for the first block that I was asking
- [00:08:50.860]about the general knowledge that participants had
- [00:08:54.370]on LGBTQ plus related terminology,
- [00:08:57.610]I was asking them and giving them
- [00:08:59.510]this big list of three terms.
- [00:09:04.130]And I was asking them to mark those terms
- [00:09:07.330]that they thought they could clearly define.
- [00:09:10.390]So they were asked to define these terms.
- [00:09:14.847]They have to mark as many as they thought
- [00:09:17.630]they could actually give a definition for.
- [00:09:20.680]I was not, like my goal was not to come to a consensus
- [00:09:25.280]about the definitions or like
- [00:09:27.440]the actual definitions of these words.
- [00:09:29.580]But I was just trying to know how many words would be marked
- [00:09:34.350]and to see the profile of those people
- [00:09:38.467]who maybe knew them all, or were familiarized
- [00:09:43.090]or acquainted with all of them
- [00:09:45.450]and know the profiles as well,
- [00:09:46.890]of those who didn't really know much about these terms.
- [00:09:54.910]So these are the results in terms of how men,
- [00:09:59.850]how many times or the percentages of how many times
- [00:10:04.400]these words or terms were marked.
- [00:10:07.810]So we see some differences,
- [00:10:09.650]some words that really stand out as being very marked
- [00:10:14.450]or not that marked throughout the survey.
- [00:10:18.995]And so in here, we have six terms that were highly marked
- [00:10:22.850]by more than 80%, most of them,
- [00:10:26.330]but by more than 80% of participants,
- [00:10:30.510]even reaching 90% where it's like gay, homosexual,
- [00:10:34.970]heterosexual, lesbian, bisexual, and drag queen,
- [00:10:37.890]they were marked many times.
- [00:10:41.970]So they are words that are better known by participants.
- [00:10:48.190]And then we had words or terms like agender, bigender,
- [00:10:52.286]gender queer, demisexual, agender variant.
- [00:10:56.460]That being the term that is the least known by participants.
- [00:11:04.910]So, then I changed the set of words, as you can see,
- [00:11:10.610]they're pretty different.
- [00:11:12.520]And I was using words intentionally
- [00:11:18.100]that have been traditionally perceived
- [00:11:20.947]as very negative words that have been used
- [00:11:25.910]against people within the LGBTQ plus community.
- [00:11:30.245]People who do not maybe fit
- [00:11:34.140]within that heteronormative spectrum.
- [00:11:38.290]So I was trying to see what were the general sentiment
- [00:11:43.730]towards these words or terms.
- [00:11:47.340]So I was asking participants to rate
- [00:11:53.960]from one to 10, one being very negative,
- [00:11:57.430]10 being very positive.
- [00:12:00.120]They had to rank every one of these terms.
- [00:12:04.640]So what I found out and the results said
- [00:12:08.909]that there were words like lesbian,
- [00:12:12.750]drag, transgender, and gay.
- [00:12:14.960]These words were marked by almost 80% of the people
- [00:12:23.530]as very positive.
- [00:12:24.700]They were ranked as 10.
- [00:12:29.170]And then we have words like Pansy, Nancy,
- [00:12:33.290]Limp-wristed, or fag, faggot.
- [00:12:35.850]These words were ranked very, very negative.
- [00:12:40.080]They were ranked at the one,
- [00:12:43.330]given the value of one
- [00:12:45.430]by some of them like Pansy, they were given
- [00:12:48.980]almost by a 100% of participants, which is very significant.
- [00:12:55.860]So the conclusions that I got from this section
- [00:12:59.520]or from this part of the survey is that first we see
- [00:13:03.440]a much stronger response to traditionally negative
- [00:13:07.499]words or slurs in comparison to the positive ones.
- [00:13:13.290]We see that the most positive word that is perceived
- [00:13:19.940]is lesbian out of that list.
- [00:13:22.670]And that is, that was marked like,
- [00:13:26.110]the highest number of people that mark that word
- [00:13:30.840]with a value of 10, very positive value
- [00:13:34.951]do not reach 80% of participants.
- [00:13:37.770]However, when we're talking about negative words,
- [00:13:41.453]they're way stronger, or strongly perceived as negative
- [00:13:47.434]by almost every participant.
- [00:13:51.160]With the word Pansy almost reaching 100%.
- [00:13:54.060]So we see that negative words,
- [00:13:58.265]comes a stronger reaction among participants.
- [00:14:02.670]We also can see that the positive perception,
- [00:14:07.290]like the words that are perceived as positive,
- [00:14:11.055]they coincide with the words that were previously
- [00:14:14.660]in the previous block with some of the words
- [00:14:17.550]that were in that list of the best known.
- [00:14:21.990]So we see and we can draw the conclusion that
- [00:14:29.090]exposure or knowing better a word and knowing
- [00:14:33.740]how to define that term or knowing what it means,
- [00:14:38.690]it's correlated with how you perceive that term.
- [00:14:44.950]I think that in this case,
- [00:14:47.380]when we were talking about LGBTQ plus terms,
- [00:14:50.840]it's related in the sense of the better,
- [00:14:54.530]what something means or the most you're exposed to that,
- [00:14:59.385]the more positive reaction you have towards that term.
- [00:15:04.530]And we're going to see how that is linked
- [00:15:06.630]to privilege and power in a moment.
- [00:15:13.089]So when participants were asked about why they ranked
- [00:15:20.260]these four terms that we have in here,
- [00:15:22.340]or they were asked why they ranked the terms
- [00:15:29.150]that were ranked as very, very negative.
- [00:15:32.320]Sorry, they were asked why to give a reason why
- [00:15:37.579]they were given those terms, that value.
- [00:15:40.980]And one of the most common replies
- [00:15:46.550]was that these terms were perceived by participants
- [00:15:50.160]as slurs, insults or dated language.
- [00:15:53.940]So these were the most common reasons given by participants
- [00:15:59.880]of why they ranked these terms as stated.
- [00:16:06.090]So we move on to the last block.
- [00:16:10.420]I was asking participants
- [00:16:12.810]about word reappropriation or reclamation.
- [00:16:16.130]So I was giving them the definition
- [00:16:18.881]and I was explaining to them if,
- [00:16:22.530]and asking if they would agree with these practice,
- [00:16:26.440]the word reclamation consist
- [00:16:29.440]on taking a word that has been traditionally used as a slur
- [00:16:33.230]or as an insult and apply somehow reverse discourse
- [00:16:40.610]in which that word that is perceived as negative
- [00:16:44.650]or used against the community, its meaning, it's reversed.
- [00:16:49.610]So people start using it in a reclaimed way.
- [00:16:55.250]And the word develops and opposing semantic interpretation.
- [00:17:00.910]So it's interpreted in a totally different way.
- [00:17:04.630]So then I was asking, using the same set of words
- [00:17:08.370]that some were considered as insults.
- [00:17:12.730]I was using the same set of words.
- [00:17:15.360]And I was asking participants,
- [00:17:17.330]which words would they reclaim,
- [00:17:19.710]or which words would they agree to be reclaimed?
- [00:17:26.400]So again, we have words like gay, lesbian,
- [00:17:29.200]transgender drag, or queen,
- [00:17:31.400]and these words were marked by a decent percentage
- [00:17:38.190]of participants that they agreed to reclaim these words.
- [00:17:44.010]Given the case that they were interpreted
- [00:17:48.690]as slurs or as an insult.
- [00:17:51.260]And then we have words like Flamer, Pansy, Poof,
- [00:17:54.240]Nancy, or Limp-wristed
- [00:17:55.767]and these words were the least voted
- [00:17:59.360]in terms of which words would you agree to be reclaimed.
- [00:18:03.330]So these words would not be acceptable to be reclaimed
- [00:18:07.720]by most of participants.
- [00:18:12.256]So now we move onto the discussion of this research.
- [00:18:19.810]Mainly I was taken on intersectional approach
- [00:18:24.100]basing on Kimberle Crenshaw.
- [00:18:29.160]Which she, the term that she developed, intersectionality.
- [00:18:35.180]So I was thinking the point of view
- [00:18:39.700]that under the premise
- [00:18:41.570]that there are several intersecting mechanisms of oppression
- [00:18:46.740]that are obviously harsher into minorities
- [00:18:52.730]that are also within another minority.
- [00:18:56.540]So there's several aspects in people's identity
- [00:19:03.125]and they can receive oppression from several aspects
- [00:19:09.570]of their identity.
- [00:19:12.040]So that's why it was very interesting to me
- [00:19:14.460]to compare not only within in-group and out-group.
- [00:19:17.560]So within the, so between heterosexual
- [00:19:22.860]or heteronormative people and the LGBTQ plus people,
- [00:19:27.810]but also within the actual community.
- [00:19:31.620]So what I did at first was to compare
- [00:19:35.200]between in-group and out-group, as I said.
- [00:19:39.510]I found out that in terms of the first questioning,
- [00:19:45.610]which I was asking participants to mark
- [00:19:48.720]how many words or terms they knew or they could define.
- [00:19:54.619]28% of participants that identified as heterosexual
- [00:19:59.700]marked 10 terms or less.
- [00:20:02.500]I remind you that there were three terms in that list.
- [00:20:07.740]On the other side, we have only 17%
- [00:20:11.580]of LGBTQ plus participants
- [00:20:13.870]that marked 10 terms or less.
- [00:20:18.610]Also, I think, and that's one of the things
- [00:20:22.020]that was not surprising, but very interesting to me
- [00:20:26.920]is that out of that 70% of LGBTQ plus participants,
- [00:20:32.820]71% were identifying as homosexual.
- [00:20:37.890]So we have to note and take into account
- [00:20:42.450]that there are many letters within the acronym LGBTQ plus,
- [00:20:49.240]and that we need to know and be aware
- [00:20:52.990]that there are some letters that have more presentation
- [00:20:57.990]and have more privilege and have more exposure
- [00:21:03.529]and therefore, more acceptance within society than others.
- [00:21:08.210]So it's very interesting that out of those people
- [00:21:13.500]that were not that aware of that many terms
- [00:21:18.380]that can be related to many others of those letters,
- [00:21:25.639]71% were identifying as homosexual,
- [00:21:29.540]which can, I think without argument,
- [00:21:34.490]be one of the letters within the acronym
- [00:21:37.170]that enjoys the most accessibility or acceptance
- [00:21:44.250]and exposure within society.
- [00:21:48.680]So that's very interesting.
- [00:21:50.560]And then I moved on to maybe a comparison
- [00:21:54.117]between in-group participants.
- [00:21:56.420]And I drew a difference
- [00:22:00.070]between heterosexual and heteronormative.
- [00:22:04.281]So there were some participants
- [00:22:09.160]that according to their responses,
- [00:22:12.170]they were fitting more into the heteronormative spectrum,
- [00:22:19.220]just because of what I just said.
- [00:22:21.470]Some people, even though they might be identifying
- [00:22:24.410]as homosexual or as bisexual, they were however,
- [00:22:30.200]enjoying the privileges or being read
- [00:22:33.210]or being identified as heteronormative.
- [00:22:39.240]So they would be fitting into the norm.
- [00:22:43.690]Which I think it was very interesting
- [00:22:45.870]to draw the difference between that as well.
- [00:22:48.350]And yeah, the conclusions that I got
- [00:22:51.270]is that having more visibility or social recognition
- [00:22:54.990]and acceptance, as I was saying,
- [00:22:57.230]that translates directly into privilege and power.
- [00:23:01.640]So we need to be conscious and aware
- [00:23:04.560]of these differences that we have.
- [00:23:08.779]So within, in terms of the reclamation of words,
- [00:23:15.056]it's very interesting as well that this only,
- [00:23:20.130]let's put the word fag or faggot as an sample.
- [00:23:24.410]We have only 17.7% of participants
- [00:23:32.890]agreed or said that they personally used
- [00:23:36.910]the word fag or faggot in a reclaimed way.
- [00:23:41.620]But we need to also see that out of that 17.7%,
- [00:23:48.200]more than 85% identified outside the binary male, female.
- [00:23:53.730]So they were not within that binary.
- [00:23:57.150]Again, they were not perceived or performing as normative.
- [00:24:06.550]So it's interesting to see how out of all the participants
- [00:24:11.680]only 17.7% would dare, let's say,
- [00:24:17.370]to reclaim or use that word to define themselves
- [00:24:22.050]or others without a negative connotation.
- [00:24:26.980]And out of all those participants,
- [00:24:29.290]only those would dare to use that word
- [00:24:33.240]and they all belonged or 85% of them belonged
- [00:24:37.560]outside the binary.
- [00:24:39.820]So I think that's very interesting as well.
- [00:24:42.730]We're seeing that the people who are bolder
- [00:24:46.210]in terms of reclaiming words
- [00:24:48.190]are the minorities within the minority.
- [00:24:51.640]So they are the less represented or less visible letters
- [00:24:56.290]within the LGBTQ plus acronym.
- [00:25:01.261]So now we're reaching the end of this presentation.
- [00:25:05.149]On further research or possible limitations as well
- [00:25:10.040]that I think I need to acknowledge in this research.
- [00:25:14.760]I think that one of them would be narrowing the sample.
- [00:25:19.850]We can cannot forget that this research
- [00:25:22.799]was done as an open survey
- [00:25:26.620]where anyone could actually complete the survey.
- [00:25:31.890]I had some measures to prevent people
- [00:25:34.230]who are not native speakers to complete the survey
- [00:25:38.830]or to be counted as valid.
- [00:25:40.690]However, there is a big range on age, race,
- [00:25:45.040]or ethnic background or country of origin.
- [00:25:48.771]So it's interesting to know that there could be
- [00:25:52.690]many more research done around these issues,
- [00:26:00.550]but I think at a smaller level and more narrowed
- [00:26:05.550]in the way that you can get specific details
- [00:26:09.990]of a specific community
- [00:26:11.680]and then compare all those research, for instance,
- [00:26:16.120]know that the word fag
- [00:26:18.500]can have a totally different meaning in the UK.
- [00:26:23.720]So maybe for them, that word might not be perceived
- [00:26:27.200]as that negative, that for someone in the US,
- [00:26:31.120]just as an example.
- [00:26:34.960]And I think that one of the other limitations as well
- [00:26:38.940]would be, it will be wonderful to do these research again,
- [00:26:43.290]but actually having access or direct access
- [00:26:47.480]to interview these people and be able to go back
- [00:26:53.390]and ask more questions if needed.
- [00:26:56.360]That would be awesome in order to go further
- [00:27:01.670]into the research.
- [00:27:05.460]So that was my presentation.
- [00:27:07.770]Thank you so much for staying, for listening to me
- [00:27:11.540]and I will be open for any questions.
- [00:27:15.300]Thank you, bye.
The screen size you are trying to search captions on is too small!
You can always jump over to MediaHub and check it out there.
Log in to post comments
Embed
Copy the following code into your page
HTML
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%; overflow: hidden; position:relative; -webkit-box-flex: 1; flex-grow: 1;"> <iframe style="bottom: 0; left: 0; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; border: 0; height: 100%; width: 100%;" src="https://mediahub.unl.edu/media/14450?format=iframe&autoplay=0" title="Video Player: Queer-Related Language and How Privilege and Heteronormativity Have an Effect on Language Perception and Use" allowfullscreen ></iframe> </div>
Comments
0 Comments