Samuel Robbins

For a book that for all intents and purposes is trying to give a cross section on world cultures, I find it interesting how few contributions revolve around the LGBTQ+ experience. The book in its tenth edition does touch on race, gender disparity, marriage customs, religious contention amongst family members, and classism on multiple fronts. At 448 pages, it would have to. Below are all the references in this book mentioning the LGBTQ+ experience. There are four. They do not constitute articles unto themselves; rather they are casual references with what appears to be little critical thought behind them. Reference to bisexuality: "The Wedding," Firoozeh Dumas, p 119, paragraph 4: "I once asked François if there was anybody he could have dated that would have bothered his mother more. 'Well,' he said, 'a black Communist bisexual would have really irked her.'" References to homosexuality: "TV as Birth Control," Fred Pearce, p 36, paragraph 36: "Many argue that soaps have played a role in triggering changes in attitudes toward homosexuality and gay marriage in Europe and North America, for instance." "Love and Marriage," p 103, under "Recommended Films on This Theme," list item 3: La Cage aux Folles (France, 1978) - A hilarious tale of a gay Saint-Tropez nightclub owner (and his lover) who pretend to be a married middle-class couple when his son becomes engaged to a girl from a conservative family. Reference to transgender experience: same section as above, list item 4: The Danish Girl (Great Britain, 2015) - A brilliant portrayal of a transgender artist. The first statement is concerning in its flippancy. The second truly is the only qualitative statement on the change in perspective toward the positive aspects of queer culture. The third and fourth are movies both lauded and criticized within the community extensively, first for displaying gross tropes and stereotypes, and second for using cis/het men to tell queer stories and profiting off of them. Despite several advances in our society to honor the LGBTQ+ community, I see an example of exclusion in this text, unintentional though it may be. Somehow that makes it sting more.