Photo by Stavrialena Gontzou on Unsplash
Through guises of ‘allyship’ and ‘advocacy,’ the “Token Gay Best Friend” trope stands in its own right, a testament to society’s continually teetering trajectory when faced with the concept of tolerance in any capacity. From serving as ‘honorary girlies,’ to clip-on accessories, masses of LGBTQ+ oriented individuals have faced objectification comparable to that of, say, a goldfish from Walmart; treated as nothing more than a mere possession. Such little regard for the individuality of queer-conforming individuals should prove to stem from systematic perpetuation of perpetrated, fetishized ideals, while simultaneously harboring influences from the shortcomings induced by the indoctrination of our current patriarchal narratives.
Quirky, fun, and delightfully clueless, the ‘gay best friend’ persona has been seen to serve as a punchline of sorts throughout various archives of televised media. Within social circles, such demographics have been seen to have accumulated quite a bit of traction, undergoing notions of subjection to a demand-driven chain, especially from more feminine-leaning archetypes. To be blatantly blunt, I honestly don’t find the movement behind such ideals to be as flattering as they’re considered to be. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with showcasing affection towards a gay best friend; however, when one is actively seen to be pining after the archetypes pertaining to that of the gay best friend, I fear, for utter lack of better phrasing, we’ve lost the plot. Moreso, as a result of the ego-inflating rhetoric graced upon such demographics (due to the idolization and adulation granted upon such perceived individuals), I fear that in hindsight, we will most definitely end up having missed the underlying thematic notions responsible for the upholding of such overtly debilitating ideals: the integral demand for validation and equality within parties belonging to such nature (prejudiced minorities).
Having gone from perceived god-defying heretics to now relatively tolerated (within social contexts, at least) ‘icons,’ minorities such as these have always been seen to attempt to conform to such norms, in any manner possible. To be complicit is to be accepted, obviously. Throughout the progression of this prideful movement, society has been seen to have reduced these minorities to nothing but ‘side characters,’ or accessories, all of which serve as recompense for their righteously bigoted rhetoric once perpetrated. Of course, it stands to reason that such bigotry has not yet been dispersed; “it’s good enough that we tolerate such heretical instincts, so why should they stand to hold as much statute as we do?” Yet at the same time, the minuscule degree to which these minorities have been integrated into certain spaces serves as enough repentance to the point that they can’t technically be deemed ‘unsupportive.’ They’re exotic, a new specimen of sorts, simply waiting for a take to be made upon their ‘character.’ What I find most detrimental, however, is the fact that minorities are playing into such roles; so desperate for validation and equality (which we all deserve to have), that we end up allowing for these rigidly bogus, demeaning ideals to stand.
Of course, there’s also a patriarchal narrative to be considered within these parameters; atypical conforming masculinity speaks against such ‘feminine notions’, i.e., wearing makeup, doing their nails, etc. It stands to reason that these ideals should be considered (if a more-feminine leaning individual were to seek out an equally feminine-leaning counterpart— of another sex— that is). However, even if one’s intentions remain wholly pure, there still come many instances of objectification when faced with such ideologies. There come the exploitative notions presented with these ‘woke ideals,’ major corporations, riding off advocative highs, manufacturing ‘rainbow pride collections,’ or ‘gayonaise,’ all serving as an attempt to boost their morale, along with their perceived proxy for alleged wokeness. There comes the objectification and accessorization of LGBTQ+ conforming individuals, reduced to nothing but glamorous entertainment. Most of all, however, there comes the perpetuation of this narrative that minorities may never truly ever possess a voice of any caliber, unless they’re rich, famous, or adored; everybody deserves a voice, so perhaps it’s time to put yours to the test.
Be First to Comment