top of page

We live in a technology-dominated society. The same technology that was once invented to make communication more accessible has been abused and is now controlling our lives. Not only are most of us blinded to these damaging effects, but we have also become entirely dependent on it. Our lives are being lived through screens. Instead of meeting others serendipitously, we meet people through calculated swipes, filters, and by carefully sifting through artificially created profiles. And honestly? I don’t fucking care for any of it.

The reason I deactivated my Facebook is because I’m not strong enough to sift through the bullshit. To be constantly fed messages of positivity, of ‘happiness’, of success and prosperity. Facebook is not an accurate representation of reality. Nor is it real. It’s superficial. It’s artificial. And it’s destroying our wellbeing. The worst part about all of this though? Our brain has not, and will not, evolve fast enough to acknowledge that these are fundamental truths.


Consciously we can identify that Facebook (and when I refer to Facebook, I really mean all forms of media and news) is not an accurate representation of society. What we cannot do though, is we cannot stop the undeniably costly effect that all of this information is having on us subconsciously. Don’t believe me? Ask people if they are happy with their bodies and the majority of them will tell you no (if they’re being honest and not idealistic). We know we should love our bodies, but we don’t. And why don’t we? For the majority of us, it has absolutely nothing to do with traumatic experiences of being bullied, instead, it’s because of the millions of images we have been processing subconsciously since birth. We are constantly being fed images of what fit, healthy, and attractive bodies look like - consciously we can rationalise why ours don’t look like that (maybe it was photoshopped), but subconsciously, we can’t. Subconsciously we internalise. We compare. We criticise. All of which creates internal conflict, emptiness, and deep-rooted dissatisfaction.


Some heterosexual individuals might wonder why homosexual adolescents still struggle so much with their identity when society has made significant gains in accepting the LGBTQI+ community. And it’s because we still live in a very heterosexual dominant society. Homosexual characters are still severely underrepresented in the media; “We cannot be, what we cannot see.” Although opinions are becoming more accepting, individuals still internalise their sexuality as being ‘wrong’. To them, it still isn’t considered ‘normal’; they still have to ‘come out’. When was the last time a straight kid ever had to ‘come out’? How many parents discuss their child’s sexuality synonymously and as freely as they do with their achievements? It doesn’t happen. Because although consciously we might be more accepting, most of us internalise the subconscious messages from the media that being gay is still deemed ‘wrong’.

Many counterarguments I’ve heard regarding the destruction of technology on our wellbeing centres around the ‘positives’ of such media, such as the increased accessibility and connection to others. But is connecting via a screen really connecting? All it is is words. You lose tonality. You lose context. And you lose body language. So you lose 95% of communication. Words, as I’m sure anyone who has ever been burned by them in a relationship will agree, are superficial. They’re easy. Flimsy. Hollow. One of the main reasons I think relationships are faltering in today’s society is because of this flimsy and empty foundational basis in which two people try to create a life from. People are becoming masters of their vocabulary; articulating the perfect concoction of words to seduce you into believing they are everything they say they are. Perfect. Whole. Secure. But all of that is a lie. Why? Because none of us are any of those things. The problem? We can’t see it, because no one lives their truth.

And the truth is, we’re all broken. And damaged. And struggling. And although that should bring comfort to know we aren’t alone, it doesn’t. Because everyone is living this same paradoxical life. One in which struggles appear absent, negative emotions repressed, and authenticity lost. Who are you when you’re not trying to be someone else? Because that’s the person this world needs to see. If you won’t do it for yourself, do it for your brother, your sister, your mother, your father, your daughter, your son – all of whom are suffering in silence much like you. What the world needs is it needs individual heroes. It needs individuals to stand in the confidence of themselves, their real selves, to show the world what it means to be human. In struggle and in success. In defeat and in prosperity. In rage and in joy. People can’t be what they can’t see – so be the hero you want to see in this world.

I heard an acclaimed author the other day say something like, “Don’t share your problems with the world in real-time, it’ll just look like you’re doing it for attention. Wait until you have learned the lesson and gotten through it before you share the struggles of your private life.” So individuals instead need to struggle in silence? That contradicts the very social nature in which we were designed. Often the hardest problems can only be resolved with a fresh pair of eyes, new ears, and alternative perspectives. Our old thoughts and methods will ultimately become stale and eventually lose their efficacy. We need to stop telling others not to feel these so called ‘negative emotions’. Nothing in this world ever changed from indifferent, emotionless individuals. We need anger; it’s the fuel that proceeds change. And it might just be the fuel that saves humanity.


Right now, I’m struggling. I’m struggling to contain my deep-rooted resentment towards white oppressive men. I’m struggling to talk to people because I refuse to do so via a screen. And I’m struggling with wanting to get to know people. Why? Because the last girl that I gave my heart wholeheartedly to and who confessed to never having felt more herself, consciously and preferentially chose to surround herself around those who made her feel like her representative self. Her ideal self. Her unobtainable self. What this communicates to me is that people would rather pretend to be someone they are not than actually be themselves. And that, to me, is overwhelmingly heartbreaking. We are being conditioned to become emotionless robots, but we are not. We are still human. And we still feel. So instead, we are being filled with despair. And emptiness. And conflict. Society, and particularly the media, is encouraging us to be these representatives – everything is encouraging us to be anything, but ourselves.

I’m worried for our future. The advancement of technology is occurring at rates that evolution cannot withstand. Our brains are not equipped to successfully process the millions of messages we receive and internalise subconsciously every day. Because of this lag, our brain is dangerously deficient in coping and defence mechanisms to counteract this poison. That is why, I believe, we have seen, and will continue to see depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and suicide rates continue to rise at alarming rates. As beneficial as helplines are, they are merely temporary bandaids for the much more complex, universal, and potentially apocalyptical crisis that is affecting the world. And until we rebel against technology, it will continue to be the silent killer; killing us in the worst way possible because we are still alive.


6 views0 comments

Over the past couple of months I have learnt that emotional pain invariably originates from misunderstandings. Whether that’s the failure to be understood or failure to understand another, one thing is true: misunderstanding causes suffering. So what does understanding create? It creates empathy. Acceptance. And love.

I have struggled with these election results. Not just because of the man elected, but because I could not understand how America consciously elected him to be president, especially given everything that we witnessed in his campaign. Ah, but what about the media’s influence I hear you say, are the media responsible for what we witnessed in not just one, but all three presidential debates? The child-like behaviour, the narcissism, the degradation of women, the racism towards Muslims, the hypocrisy, the lies, the failure to take accountability for his words and actions, the emotional instability, the clear absence of respect for others - yeah that was Trump as his most authentic self.


When I look at Trump, that is all I see. I see a man who does not represent the American people, he represents a small minority; white, wealthy, straight men. I do not see anything that he proposes to do for this country because I cannot see past the aforementioned shortcomings. And perhaps that is very close-minded, or perhaps it is merely because that is what is important to me.

Because this is what I see in Trump, admittedly it was all I saw in his supporters too. And it enraged me. How could anyone support such a clearly racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic bigot like him without being one themselves? I didn’t understand. And that caused such negative energy to reside within me. Anger. Frustration. Disappointment. I have been filled with all of these spiteful emotions even prior to these election results. I assumed that supporting a candidate meant that you not only agree, but also condone all that he represents. But tonight, I think differently.


Scott Stabile wrote a fantastic piece on this very issue tonight stating, “They weren’t voting against my interests. They were voting for their own. That’s how elections work. No candidate will meet all of our desires. We decide what issues we care about the most, and what convictions we’re willing to compromise along the way.” He further continues, “A news reporter stationed himself at a polling place in rural Pennsylvania on election day. He asked a woman in her mid-40s if she was voting for Trump or Clinton. She said she had a couple kids in high school and wanted them to graduate and be able to find jobs. She planned to vote for Trump, even though she “didn’t like some things about him,” because she believed he was a better choice for the economy. “I’m voting for my children,” she said.

The reporter interviewed another woman, mid-30s, who was also voting for Trump. He asked her if she was bothered by the things Trump has said about women. She answered “yes, definitely,” but that she was bothered more by the threat of terrorism and felt that he would keep the country more secure.”

These individuals voted for Trump because of what was most important to them and their situation. They didn’t vote for Trump because they thought that his behaviour was by any means acceptable, it was merely less important than issues of the economy and security. Can I really judge them for that?


The reason I struggled to understand these individuals who supported Trump is because social issues are very important to me. My life is governed by the value of how we treat one another. We are all humans and we are all deserving of respect. To see a man so clearly disregard that, how could I possibly support anything that man stood for when he failed to fulfil the value that is most important in my life?

I understand that this value is not shared by all, nor is it overly important to many. I can respect that. I also hope that others can respect that this value is of the utmost importance to me and I cannot, and will not, support someone who fails to fulfil it. In the words of Scott Stabile, “And let’s remember each other in the interactions that make up our day. If you don’t support Trump, please remember that the majority of his supporters are not white nationalist racists. If you’re in conversation with others who want to lump all Trump supporters into some hateful category, speak up if you can. Be courageous enough to say you don’t support Trump but you don’t condemn all those who voted for him. Be a voice for unity, not division.

If you voted for Trump, please remember your candidate was not only enthusiastically endorsed by the KKK, but he himself spent much of his campaign insulting minorities and immigrants. If you’re in conversation with others who support his bigoted views, speak up if you can. Be courageous enough to say you support Trump, but you don’t agree with bigotry of any kind. Be a voice for unity, not division.”


I have no doubt that we will all be okay, we usually always are. But telling someone “everything is going to be okay” only does one thing: invalidates what they are presently feeling. Things aren’t okay for many. Whether they’re riddled by fear, rage, devastation, sadness, grief, or fury, we need to let them feel. We need to encourage them to feel. Suppressing, struggling, and fighting against our feelings only intensifies and prolongs them. It also creates secondary emotions of resentment, bitterness, guilt, and hate – none of which serve anyone.


So if you are not a Trump supporter, I encourage you to feel what you need to feel. I encourage you to be as humanly you as you are, in all the beautiful assortment of emotions that make you real. I encourage you to be loud and vocal; do not be silenced or suppressed, even to appease those on Facebook. It’s about time we use Facebook to accurately portray what it means to be a human, to be real, to be alive. If you are a Trump supporter, I encourage you to step into that space of misunderstanding and to empathise with your fellow Americans (and non-Americans). We can unite through this, but first we must acknowledge, understand, and accept what others are presently thinking and feeling. “Because the truth is, rarely can a response make something better, what makes something better is connection.” And connection starts from understanding.




0 views0 comments

WARNING: This post contains spoilers.

I just finished watching Wentworth last night and I am livid, heartbroken, and enraged. At first glance, Bea Smith’s death just seems like the termination of a main protagonist, but for anyone emotionally invested in the show, they know it was much more than that. I get it – main characters have to die occasionally. Whether it’s merely for added drama or because of an actress’s obligations with another show, some good things must come to an end. I can accept that. What I can’t accept though, is the overrepresentation of deaths to openly gay or bisexual protagonists who are already underrepresented in the media.


Some of you might be rolling your eyes at my last sentence and responding with, “Get over it,” or “It’s just a television series, don’t take it so seriously,” but how can we not? (And by we, I’m referring specifically to the LGBTQI+ community). Media, specifically television, has an undeniably powerful influence on our beliefs of the world. How many of you believe in a “happily ever after” with specific reference to relationships? Almost everyone does on some subconscious level. Have you ever wondered where this concept originated from? Probably from those Disney movies you adored when you were a child - the hero always got the girl and it was always a happily ever after. It’s not unreasonable to suggest we have all been brainwashed into adopting this same unrealistic expectation of relationships. Except for gays. What have they learned from television? That there is no happily ever after.


This statement might seem like an exaggeration, but it’s not. Ever since 1976, there have been 166 recurring and open lesbian and bisexual characters that have died in television series (See: Autostraddle). Although that number might not initially seem like a lot, take into consideration that gays represent less than 4% of total characters on screen (which is a gross underrepresentation of reality). Not only is it an issue that these characters are being killed off, but it’s the manner in which they are being killed. Frequently their deaths proceed a long-awaited exchange of intimacy or an extremely joyous occasion, all of which heightens the heartbreak of their death.

All of this was first brought to my attention earlier this year when I was watching The 100, a television series on the CW. Part of my motivation for watching this series was because of the “ship” (relationship) between Clarke and Lexa, an openly gay female protagonist in power. Their first exchange of intimacy occurred in Season 2, Episode 14 and the media world went crazy. Individuals from all over the world started to ship these two characters and the director, Jason Rothenberg, capitalised on this. He continued to build suspense and sexual tension until Season 3, Episode 7 when Clarke and Lexa became intimate. FINALLY! Nearly nine episodes after their first kiss they finally solidified their connection in a highly anticipated sex scene. Everyone, particularly the LGBTQI+ community, was relieved. Excited. Joyous. Ahhh all the feels! But that ended less than two minutes later when Lexa died. And not heroically either. She died by a stray bullet.


The same situation rings true for Bea Smith in Wentworth. For numerous episodes, the directors built the sexual tension and excitement of something new and foreign between Bea and Allie Novak. This consequently created audience members to start “shipping” their relationship, i.e. rooting for them to be together. And in Episode 11, Season 4, they were finally open about their relationship. In Episode 12, we saw a beautifully sensual and romantically intimate exchange between these two characters; Bea’s first time. Less than five minutes later though, and Allie was fighting for her life after Ferguson (the Freak) gave her a “hot shot” (drug overdose). When Bea received news from Maxine (a prominent transsexual character who is dying of cancer) that Allie would never breathe by herself again, Bea was shattered and distraught. She took it upon herself to attempt to kill Ferguson which ultimately led to her own demise. And the demise of her and Allie’s relationship. After countless episodes of impatiently agonising over their ship, we were granted a measly few moments of pleasure. Seems reasonable right?

So why is this all a big deal? Well, when we are constantly being influenced the images we see on television, how is the LGBTQI+ community ever supposed to believe in a happy ending for themselves when it doesn’t even exist in a fictional world? When these significant deaths occur, moments after very passionate, intimate exchanges, it subconsciously communicates that sex between two women is “bad”. Again, you might be rolling your eyes at this statement, but this is easily explained through trace conditioning. When the neutral stimulus (NS) is proceeded by an unconditioned stimulus (UCS), and the interstimulus interval (ISI) is extremely short, the UCS will then become associated with the NS. In this example, sex is the neutral stimulus and death is the unconditioned stimulus. Because the time lapse (ISI) between the two is extremely short, the UCS, death, becomes associated to the NS, sex. The audience, specifically the LGBTQI+ community who is invariably significantly invested in one or both characters, will associate lesbian or bisexual sex with death, or at the very least, with something “bad”.


After the death of Lexa in The 100, the fans revolted. There are also claims that some fans were driven to harm themselves and even consider suicide. For many, this might seem extreme. But Lexa’s death was not an isolated incident; this demise of openly gay and bisexual protagonists has been occurring since 1976. And just recently, between June 1, 2015 and May 31, 2016, there have been 26 lesbian and bisexual women killed off. These include, but are not limited to, Sara Harvey from Pretty Little Liars, Poussey Washington from Orange is the New Black, and Helen from Masters of Sex (See: LGBT Fans Deserve Better).


When members of the LGBTQI+ community so heavily identify with other like-minded characters in television series, the characters’ deaths can not only be heartbreaking, but can also be emotionally traumatising. Because they see themselves in and live vicariously through these characters, they begin to mirror their emotions and feel what their screen counterparts feel. So when a character has just had sex, the elation experienced is not isolated to those on the screen, it overflows to its audience. But to proceed such a liberating, sensual, and positive experience with a death? Yeah, that might fuck a few people up.

For many who are not yet open about their sexuality, witnessing LGBTQI+ protagonists offers a sense of community and belongingness, albeit fictional. Additionally, the LGBTQI+ community is grossly underrepresented in the media so whenever an openly gay or bisexual character is a protagonist, individuals latch on because, well, they don’t have a lot to choose from. Another reason individuals of the LGBTQI+ community readily identify with LGBTQI+ protagonists is because of this “Bury Your Gays” trope. Because maybe, just maybe, this time will be different. Maybe there will be a happy ending. Maybe there is hope for all of us after all. But, that maybe is still yet to become a reality.

So what effect does killing off gay and bisexual protagonists have on individuals in the LGBTQI+ community? Well I cannot speak for anyone else, but I can speak for myself. Bea Smith’s death was not just about a protagonist dying; the hope of her relationship with Allie died with her too. The hope of any kind of enduring lesbian relationship in this show was terminated along with her death. People might argue, well there’s still Franky Doyle and Bridget Westfall, but they are no longer main protagonists. Nor is their relationship a primary focus. I was devastated last night upon watching the series finale. The heaviness in my chest was not just isolated to this fictional event; it brought back feelings of former personal relationships that have ended. I found myself saying things like, “Fuck love,” and, “What’s the point in loving if there’s never a happy ending, even in a fictional world?” Some might argue that I’m too attached to characters in this fictional world, but our subconscious uncontrollably projects our beliefs about reality from this world. Although I can consciously remind myself that television is not an accurate representation of reality, subconsciously I internalise all of these emotions; the heartbreak, the disappointment, and the emotionally shattering realisation that there is and might never be, a happy ending for characters I so heavily identify with. This leads me to question; what chance do I have?

LGBTQI+ Fans Deserve Better.

Autostraddle: http://www.autostraddle.com/all-65-dead-lesbian-and-bisexual-characters-on-tv-and-how-they-died-312315/

LGBT Fans Deserve Better: http://lgbtfansdeservebetter.com/blog/2016/06/01/all-dead-lesbian-and-bisexual-women-on-tv-2016-2017/

4 views0 comments
bottom of page