There are organizations that presume to have the best interests of others in mind or that claim to have privileged knowledge pertaining to what is in everyone's best interest. Any organization or group that allows itself this kind of absolute certainty should be placed under a lens scrutiny and closely assessed. It would be prudent to examine any group claiming to have concocted a one size fits all formula to living life with suspicion and doubt. The organization Focus on the Family is a tax exempt evangelical Christian organization that asserts itself as having attained the ideal equation for the perfect family. In addition to this their mission statement “nurturing and defending the God-ordained institution of the family and promoting biblical truths worldwide.” (Focus on the Family), offers further illumination into their incentives. As a method geared towards gaining some personal insight into and to educe the many possible facets of Focus on the Family's motivations, I détourned their logo. In doing this I hoped to shed light upon what I feel is and has been the organization's greatest negative impact upon families across the United States as well as the effects of their endeavors in counties halfway across the globe.
When looking at Focus on the Family's motto which is “helping families thrive”, one might assume positive things concerning their agenda. They are here to help, to do what they can to assist families in need and families in general. But when the time is taken to further investigate their actions, impact, and behavior towards different groups; a few questions come to mind. If they are here to help families, why do they exclude certain families and family members based upon the following criteria: sexual orientation, appearance, parenting choices, religious background, and personal decisions? As well, why does Focus on the Family frequently act antagonistic towards individuals they have chosen to exclude? If they are not acting antagonistic towards a group or persons, then Focus on the Family spends much of its effort attempting to alter the behavior of the excluded until those persons or groups better reflect their standards. Observing these mixed signals is enough to make one wonder what their actual intentions are. Do they mean to harm, to help, subjugate, or change people for the better?
When scrutinizing these perceptibly contradictory possibilities, it is important to remember that family is dependent upon acceptance, communication, respect for each other, as well as an understanding and dynamic not often observed outside of family. If an organization like Focus on the Family actively works to exclude or forcibly alter specific members of a family and by alter I mean change the character of who those members are, its efforts are indirectly or perhaps directly breaking down the basic structure of some families. It becomes difficult to decipher the intentions of a group that seems to hold so many contradictory aspirations, and if we examine it further, the irony of this obfuscated situation is that the lack of clarity in it appears to be an intentional construction. If the intentions presented by Focus on the Family contradict with the real-life actions they take and the ultimate consequences of those actions, then a different question must be asked. What motivates an organization like Focus on the Family to persistently behave in this way when the observable effects of their endeavors contradict their supposed cause of “helping families thrive”?
My détournement centered on Focus on the Family's long standing cause to alienate and discriminate against individuals who do not fit the mold for what they consider acceptable. For my culture jam I concentrated my efforts towards online groups holding anti-homosexual sentiments. The globally targeted agendas of these organizations mirror those of Focus on the Family. The efforts of these groups have proven to be damaging to individuals who have not willfully made life choices that merit them becoming the targets of such zealous animosity. The motivations directing these organizations appear to be propelled by intolerance and geared towards the estrangement of individuals deemed to be either unacceptable or undesirable from society. Focus on the Family's attempts as well as the attempts of these groups to legislate and proliferate their ideological stand point across the globe have produced detrimental consequences for many.
The emotionally damaging and erroneous ventures of Focus on the Family in pursuits like homosexual conversion therapy and lobbying against an anti-bullying bill simply because it mentioned (in brief) bullying that targeted homosexual students. Efforts of this sort can alienate individuals growing up and may often create very real and very negative impacts on people's lives.
In a news report (2010) by Goldman:
The Colorado-based organization says the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network has targeted thousands of school districts nationwide with literature. "Schools are only allowed to provide one message about homosexuality; that it's normal and should be embraced," Focus on the Family said of the gay group's message. (p. 2).
As seen above, Focus on the Family and its members show a marked degree of intolerance and inability to recognize their own antipathy towards those outside their ideology and worldview. The organization refuses to recognize the importance of noting of any differences that might potentially make young individuals more likely to become the victims of bullying. Focus on the Family shows an amazing amount of interest in preventing education that does not fit to their standards but has little problem providing education or more appropriately reeducation tailored to their needs.
If they are not commenting on how inappropriate mention of orientation outside of hetero-normative standards is, then they are busy reeducating those who fall outside of hetero-normative standards. In an interview (2008) by Draper, “Focus says the conferences started a national conversation on the origins of homosexuality and have nurtured thousands of troubled families and helped hundreds of former gays and lesbians 'escape the lifestyle.'” (p. 1). The emotional harm inherent in telling another that they are not alright as they are and that they can be changed is difficult to measure. Regardless of this, there is no denying that this kind of approach has destroyed families. This organization is unable to or unwilling to examine the impact of their behavior. The extent of Focus on the Family's desire to standardize this type of intolerance is far reaching.
The best example relating to the scope and impact of organizations such as this would have to be the situation in Uganda, where their impact is readily apparent. To be precise, the influence of such groups is easily seen in Uganda's anti-homosexual bill where people are threatened by the potentiality of receiving penalties as high as the death sentence for homosexual acts.
In an article (2010) by Gettleman:
“Now we really have to go undercover,” said Stosh Mugisha, a gay rights activist who said she was pinned down in a guava orchard and raped by a farmhand who wanted to cure her of her attraction to girls. She said that she was impregnated and infected with H.I.V., but that her grandmother’s reaction was simply, “ ‘You are too stubborn.’ ” (p. 3).
These are likely not the intended effects of these organizations, but their actions abroad have exasperated their occurrence. All these factors influenced how I approached my détournement.
When détourning Focus on the Family's logo, I had a specific purpose in how I reinterpreted the symbolism of the image. I manipulated the logo to elicit feelings of shame from the people viewing it. To do this I took the language and symbolism of the image subverted it and set it against its authors. I converted the message of familial bonding by turning that message inside out; specifically, I reappropriated the imagery by changing it into that which expressed a sense of loss. The logo as presented by Focus on the Family features a child whose hands are being held by two supportive parent figures. The gender of the parents, respectively, as male and female is seemingly implied by the proportional size differences of the hands located on either side of the child. The image is meant to evoke feelings of joy, personal satisfaction and contentedness. I used the iconography of Focus on the Family and warped it to evoke feelings diametrically opposite of the ones it was meant to provoke. I achieved this by taking the image and altering the placement of the hands until they were no longer holding the arms of the child. Through this manipulation I created a sense of abandonment instead of the feelings of support and bonding the logo was meant to present. To further the effect I placed fire surrounding the icon of the child as supplementation, adding connotations of abandonment as well as symbolic implications of the ideological concept of Hell.
After I had détourned the organization's logo I utilized it on a few Facebook pages and online forums. These pages included: Reinstate Proposition 8, Protect Marriage, and Million Against Same-Sex Marriage. My goal in my détournement was to induce strong feelings of shame and self-doubt. While I believe I was effective in visually creating an image meant to induce those feelings, the results produced by placing my détournement in the view of those supportive and receptive of Focus on the Family were frequently those of animosity and derision. The image was typically removed not long after I had posted it. The final outcome always resulted in my banning from these groups.
I believe these reactions were not evidence against the effectiveness of my détournement, but instead evidence proving its effectiveness. The typical response produced by those met with a perspective that does not mesh with their accepted standard of reality is denial of its validity and refusal to examine it objectively. While I had hoped to see at least one thoughtful response, I regret to say that I received none. Regardless, this did offer some insight into the intolerance present in and antipathy of individuals who subscribe to the doctrines espoused by Focus on the Family.
Draper, Electa. "Focus on the Family Focuses on Homosexuals - The Denver Post." Home - The Denver Post. Web. 12 Oct. 2010. <http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_10788844>.
Focus on the Family: Helping Families Thrive. Web. 13 Oct. 2010. <http://www.focusonthefamily.com/>.
Gettleman, Jeffrey. "Americans’ Role Seen in Uganda Anti-Gay Push." New York Times. 3 Jan. 2010. Web. 5 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/world/africa/04uganda.html>.
Goldman, Russell. "School Anti-Bullying Programs Push Gay Agenda, Christian Group Focus on the Family Says - ABC News." ABCNews.com - ABCNews.com: Breaking News, Politics, World News, Good Morning America, Exclusive Interviews - ABC News. Web. 13 Oct. 2010. <http://abcnews.go.com/US/school-anti-bullying-programs-push-gay-agenda-christian/story? id=11527833&page=1>.
No comments:
Post a Comment