Alternative Media.

As I've studied just recently, alternative media is the kind of media that isn't commercially appealing. It isn't the same as radical media, although radical media can be considered alternative (as it doesn't fit into any mainstream area). Alternative media can be different in content, structure, economics and participants, as most well known studies have shown. But this isn't about the media in itself. As I was reading about the principle debate on mainstream and alternative media, it got me thinking about the social rules and order.

Heterosexual relationships are considered, if we apply this notion, to be mainstream. The society acknowledges and facilitates such relationships, because this is what we've come to know as 'normal' and 'expected'. We're brought into this world, we grow up and eventually old, and society expects us to go to school, get married, pop out a baby or five, then grow old with your more-or-less ideal mate. So. Let's take the four different elements that differentiate mainstream from alternative.

1. Participants.
One woman, one man.
2. Structure:
Heterosexual relationship.
3. Economics:
Usually, following the old-fashioned hierarchical pattern, where she earns less than him (if any), mostly in order to not wound the male ego.
3. Content:
Hopefully, those teeny-tiny babies I mentioned in the above paragraph. Maybe a holiday house somewhere mediocre at best. One joint account, holding savings for rainy days. A two-car garage, accompanied by your regular 3 bedroom house somewhere in the suburbs. And mostly nothing to talk about other than finances and brand diapers/cereal. He watches the game, while she sets up the dinner table.

That's socially acceptable. That's what mainstream is and while being utterly wrong, the media actually perpetuates that. Moving on.

Same-sex relationships. Ah, the alternative that this represents. Considered by many the devil incarnate, for it (apparently) breaks marriages and forces children to grow up abused and emotionally scarred. May I be the first one to point out that people in same-sex relationships were also brought up with the same societal rules? But just like alternative (not radical!) media, they may have taken a different path.

1. Participants:
Two people of the same gender. (i.e. two women, or two men)
2. Structure:
Same-sex relationship.
3. Economics:
You'd be surprised. Many people in same sex relationships also feel threatened by their spouse earning more, but we're just not inclined to make such a big deal out of it.
4. Content:
Again, what a surprise. With a slight variation, they too want the same boring things. A house of their liking, a car, some money saved for retirement and maybe even a toddler or two. Coming from a socially oppressed medium though, they will probably have more to talk about. Should they choose to do so.

The coverage in the media has made it quite clear that although same-sex marriage will be legalised (mostly likely), it would never mean the same thing as whatever it means now. I say 'whatever' because I'm fairly sure most people have lost the perspective on this issue and are just following the trend. Some say it's bad? Mainstream it as bad. Some claim it as a good thing? Hooray with the marriage (same-sex) bill.

There is a huge but in this whole thing, though. Most alternative media started out as outlandish and unheard of, but then got picked up by the mainstreamers and turned into something usual, common. Unless you think same-sex relationships are radical (which would mean they aim to change social order), that's exactly what's going to happen to this alternative idea. And then you have to wonder. What are you fighting for or against?