Hey Hetero! Poster Campaign

In honor of "Gaypril," Harvey Mudd College's club PRISM is distributing a series of posters created by Australian artist Deborah Kelly with photographer Tina Fiveash in order to spread light on the uproar around the LGBTQ community. They remind people to look back at what they take for granted rather than the things that stand out to them. The posters provide a different viewpoint to look from.


The Hey Hetero! poster campaign aims to highlight and expose heterosexual privilege. Privilege is defined by the Free Dictionary as "a special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste." It is no one person's fault, and as such, these posters are not meant as an attack on individuals, but rather as a critique of an issue that is often not discussed or confronted. Confronting one’s privilege can be uncomfortable and confusing, but we urge you to be aware of it and talk about it.

We invite every member of the 5C community, regardless of their sexuality, gender identity, or opinions on these posters, to join in the discussion.

PRISM will be using this blog to begin discussions on the posters. We know some people may find them controversial, and we want to know what people have to say. Post back with your feedback.

Also, there will be an actual discussion occurring on Tuesday, April 19th at 5:30 PM in the Hoch-Shanahan Dining Hall's Aviation Room. Come by, eat food with us, and tell us what you think of the posters!

Sexual Targets

Baby

Family

No Fear.

Marriage

Membership Privileges

some other comments

these comments came from a Facebook thread, and are being reposted with permission. I didn't obtain everyone's permission, so some things may seem out of context. I thought I'd put them on a different post because the one on the main one already has multiple discussions going.

A: kind of wants to gag these 'hey hetero' posters that are all around campus. Couldn't they have found a way to include, oh, say, ONE person of color? Also, they're mad condescending. Like, I understand their point, but they bother me.


B: I understand the point of leaving out people of color, for the most part, as being an implicit suggestion that white heterosexuality really does have mad flexibility in our western marriage institution

C: ‎... so when is it ok to discuss it and when is it not? should we never mention it and assume that everyone is as knowledgeable on the matter as everyone else? If we really look around us this message still needs to be sent out. Gay people still cant marry and restraints and oppression on one's sexual behavior is still very prevalent even at our sweet little 5Cs. also i doubt it is supposed to be condescending, often people use jokes and laughter as the only way to deal with harsher realities. I dont think silencing people is the answer, and those posters were just a pleasant way of making one self heard.

C: ‎... The posters are not for straight people bashing. It is critiquing the idea of their being one way for people to live and be happy and normal. As a heterosexual, i feel that the posters apply to me too. There are a lot of social restrictions on straight people to. The poster is saying, you dont have to get married, have a baby, and buy lots of toasters and be a white middle class product consumer to be perfect. The posters are not a critique of you, but of society. its not a critique of a society with mostly married straight people, but a society that says you must be married and straight and a parent and a consumer to fit in. The posters have deeper meanings than what it appears because that is how symbolism works. It wants you to think.

A: [C] darling, everyone here is capable of thinking and likely does. But still, whether we think deeply or not, these posters are evoking certain emotional responses that are not necessarily linked to the message trying to be sent. Besides, there is more than one way to interpret art, which these posters are. You can't tell people not to be affected by art personally. I appreciate your interpretation, and can see it now, but it's not what I was getting out of them. 

Whether they are critiquing society or they are critiquing me, they still come across- to me - as using a condescending tone that I don't think is necessarily helping their cause. They just make me feel alienated from the queer community (which arguably I belong in) and not want to get involved in a supporting or any other manner.

tl;dr: I get their purpose, I just don't agree with the way they're doing it.

A: okay, just one more question. Is angry queer art supposed to make non-homophobic people want to tear it down and throw it away? 

These posters make me mad. I don't like them and they're invading my personal space. They're in the place I LIVE. I'm going to have to see them EVERY single time I leave my room until they finally come down, which may be next year. I can't remove them because that's not PC. I'M not a bigot, I'M not an asshole, hell, I don't even identify as heterosexual. But they're in my life and I don't like it.
You know that if they were aimed at the queer community, people would be up in arms in an instant, taking them down and going to counselling sessions. Hell, I'D be up in arms. But I will not back down on this. I don't like them and nothing said in this thread so far has changed my stance on this.

A: I know it's nothing personal, but it's personally affecting me.

A: you're having a problem with people. I'm having a problem with paper. The paper will still be there in the wee hours of the morning. It will be there every single time I leave my room. There are not ALWAYS people standing there giving you stank eye.

D: I wasn't gonna jump in on this, but I'd just like to add that the campaign (as its main goal) is definitely NOT promoting "political correctedness" or maybe even "equality." It's really worth it to engage with the posters and exactly what they're trying to say (see: angry queer art). The posters aren't trying to pass gay marriage laws; they're not trying to demonize all heterosexuals. They're not even trying to further "their cause" (even thought the "causes" of queers are many and multiple). they're just using some really campy, over-the-top heteronormative signifiers to get people to think about heterosexual privilege, particularly those who've never thought about the ways that heterosexuality is structurally favored.