I'm a straight woman, but it seems to me that gay men tend to be nicer, gentler people than straight men? Am I correct on this or way off-base? G.
Well I'm sure there are a lot of women who may feel as you do -- but it's probably because a gay man isn't likely to give you the grief that a straight boyfriend or husband can. Straight women can fall in love with gay men and become heart-broken, but it usually isn't because the gay man has led them on.
The image of gay men as being nicer and gentler -- that is, softer -- is why a lot of people think erroneously that gay men aren't tough enough to serve in the military. As I've often said, we're a diversified bunch. I've met gay men who are very sweet people who'd never hurt a soul, and gay men who are real S.O.Bs. Ditto for straight men. You've heard women complain about guys who say they're gonna call but never do or otherwise mistreat them? Well, some gay men often have the same complaint about the gay guys they date.
Gay men may be more open-minded and less sexist than their straight counterparts, but in general gay men come in all varieties, some nice, some not so nice. We're just people, after all. And we are men, with all -- good or bad or in-between -- that implies.
On the other side of the coin, there are people -- including, sadly, gay people -- who think that gay men are somehow worse than straight men in certain ways. In his book The Price of Achievement: Coming Out in Reagan Days (1995), which I just caught up with, Gay Republican (!) W. Scott Thompson states that gay men are more likely to steal and lie! This is probably because Thompson, who had been married with children before coming out, expected that only straight men took somebody's phone number, said they were gonna call, and didn't. (He broke up with a second fiancee by letter!!!) He also invited guests to gay parties at his Dupont Circle townhouse and some of them stole the silverware. But this is a guy who admittedly picked up good-looking tramps on the street and brought them home, supposedly to help improve their lot in life, so you can imagine his choice of party guests wasn't too ideal. [May I say that Thompson's book is stimulating, thought-provoking and well-written, but I disagree with his generalizations of gay men (possibly motivated by a degree of buried but not obliterated self-hatred?) Republicans!
Gay men are no more likely to steal from their friends or lie to people than anyone else, and it is outrageous to suggest so.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Under the Radar
Dr. Bill,
I am doing my thesis research on the differences between student opinions about homosexuality at a liberal college vs the opinions of students at a conservative christian college. Both schools are in South Carolina. Here is my problem. I have very liberal and understanding professors on my thesis board, but the president of student relations and services has to approve my topic. If at all possible can you give me words that involve the gay, lesbian, trans-gender, bisexual and other members of our community that are not too showy. They don't want me to use the word homosexual because they see it as a red flag. I am very passionate about my work and think it is important but do not want small minded conservatives to block my research and my voice. What I found in previous research is that even though our younger generations state that they are religious, they do not have a problem with gays, lesbians, bisexuals, trans-genders...living their lives with the same rights, liberties, and hassle-free freedoms as everyone else. Could you please help me. I know this is a lot but I am not sure how to word things and what to say so that I may slip under their radar. Thanks, TS
Hi, thanks for your question. I would suggest that you use the term "marginalized minorities" or "marginalized minority groups." Or perhaps "disaffected Americans." You not only want to avoid the word "homosexual" but "sexual" as well, so sexual minorities won't do. Marginalized minorities can be just about anything, so it may not raise a red flag. I'm not certain how many people these days are really aware of what LGBT means, but it's become fairly commonplace, as has queer. So maybe "marginalized minorities" or "disaffected groups or Americans" will work for you. Let me know. And best of luck with the project.
I am doing my thesis research on the differences between student opinions about homosexuality at a liberal college vs the opinions of students at a conservative christian college. Both schools are in South Carolina. Here is my problem. I have very liberal and understanding professors on my thesis board, but the president of student relations and services has to approve my topic. If at all possible can you give me words that involve the gay, lesbian, trans-gender, bisexual and other members of our community that are not too showy. They don't want me to use the word homosexual because they see it as a red flag. I am very passionate about my work and think it is important but do not want small minded conservatives to block my research and my voice. What I found in previous research is that even though our younger generations state that they are religious, they do not have a problem with gays, lesbians, bisexuals, trans-genders...living their lives with the same rights, liberties, and hassle-free freedoms as everyone else. Could you please help me. I know this is a lot but I am not sure how to word things and what to say so that I may slip under their radar. Thanks, TS
Hi, thanks for your question. I would suggest that you use the term "marginalized minorities" or "marginalized minority groups." Or perhaps "disaffected Americans." You not only want to avoid the word "homosexual" but "sexual" as well, so sexual minorities won't do. Marginalized minorities can be just about anything, so it may not raise a red flag. I'm not certain how many people these days are really aware of what LGBT means, but it's become fairly commonplace, as has queer. So maybe "marginalized minorities" or "disaffected groups or Americans" will work for you. Let me know. And best of luck with the project.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Settling Scores
A straight guy who works at a mixed (gay and straight) bar in my town seems friendly on the surface, but when he's holding court over some of his straight friends he makes generalizations about gays that, frankly, make my blood boil. (I don't think he knows what my orientation is because I'm not stereotypical.) Gay men are this, gay men are that. I wouldn't necessarily say he's outright homophobic, but it's like he ignores the realities and diversities of the gay men who come into the bar and spews out these same old stereotypical notions. What do I do about it? Anon.
Say something. But first, go into the bar with a male date and make out at the bar right in front of this schmo. That way he'll know he'd better watch his step around you and watch what he says. Then the next time he says something stupid, definitely call him on it. Or say something before then. It's a perfect opportunity to educate someone. If he's an intelligent person, he can learn from what you have to say. If he's an asshole -- and he just might be -- then you're wasting your breath. But still try it. If this is a bar that welcomes gays and takes their money, why should you have to put up with his dumb remarks?
I can relate to what you say that even though he works in a bar with many gay customers he only sees what he wants to see. Some straight-identified men are only comfortable with gay men who fit into their narrow notions of what it means to be a gay man. It's like the rest of us are invisible. It's similar to white racists who only see African-Americans in limited terms, and can't see the diversity of that community even when it's staring them in the face.
Lastly, even people who seem gay-friendly can be homophobic or have some outdated, homophobic notions. Don't simmer in silence. Confront them on it. It may make for an unpleasant experience if the person you confront is a jerk, but maybe you'll get a pleasant surprise.
In any case, don't let him get away with it.
Say something. But first, go into the bar with a male date and make out at the bar right in front of this schmo. That way he'll know he'd better watch his step around you and watch what he says. Then the next time he says something stupid, definitely call him on it. Or say something before then. It's a perfect opportunity to educate someone. If he's an intelligent person, he can learn from what you have to say. If he's an asshole -- and he just might be -- then you're wasting your breath. But still try it. If this is a bar that welcomes gays and takes their money, why should you have to put up with his dumb remarks?
I can relate to what you say that even though he works in a bar with many gay customers he only sees what he wants to see. Some straight-identified men are only comfortable with gay men who fit into their narrow notions of what it means to be a gay man. It's like the rest of us are invisible. It's similar to white racists who only see African-Americans in limited terms, and can't see the diversity of that community even when it's staring them in the face.
Lastly, even people who seem gay-friendly can be homophobic or have some outdated, homophobic notions. Don't simmer in silence. Confront them on it. It may make for an unpleasant experience if the person you confront is a jerk, but maybe you'll get a pleasant surprise.
In any case, don't let him get away with it.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
A Question of Monogamy -- and More
You've had some posts about casual sex and promiscuity and they've bothered me. If the gay community is going to find acceptance, it had better clean up its act. I'm a gay man, but I'm not a pig. Let's face it, if gay men are filthy and spread diseases, who can they blame but each other? It's not straight people giving them AIDS. Why can't gays be monogamous and then their image will improve? Anon.
Their image, huh? Your question bothers me on so many different levels that I'm not certain where to begin, but here are some points to consider.
A.) You are part of the gay community. It's not You versus Them. And you are hardly the only gay man who believes in monogamy. Look at all the couples lining up to get married. I'd bet most of them intend to have a strictly monogamous relationship. Get past the stereotypes.
B.) AIDS/HIV affects heterosexuals as well as homosexuals. It is not a "gay" disease. Let the homophobes call it that -- you certainly shouldn't.
C.) You reveal a fair amount of self-hatred when you talk about "pigs" and gay men are "filthy." To be blunt, have you not been getting any lately? This is the kind of talk I often hear from gay men who have no love or sex lives and are, frankly, jealous of those who do. Sorry to be so blunt with you but this has to be addressed. (More on this in a future post).
D.) Whether to be monogamous and faithful or have an open relationship is a personal choice made by the two parties involved. One person -- and this is equally true in straight relationships -- may prefer a monogamous relationship and the other one does not. This leads to problems when the latter partner, gay or straight, is unfaithful. But this happens in many relationships regardless of the orientation of the individuals involved.
E.) There is a big difference between a man who is sexually active but responsible, who practices safe sex, and one who is unsafe and irresponsible. This is true of straight people as well as gay. Being sexually active does not necessarily add up to being "promiscuous," or a "sex addict" or someone who sleeps with anything that moves and is irresponsible in their sexual practices and choices. Not everyone wants to be monogamous, and I see no reason why all gay men should do so just to supposedly be accepted by a society that will hate them anyway whether they have sex with one man or many men. It is foolish to believe that if all gay people got married, adopted children, and lived monogamous relationships in the suburbs that we would find instant acceptance. Some people hate us for who we love and who we have sex with, and being "monogamous" would not change that. (And who on Earth says that all straight couples are monogamous? What a joke!)
F.) There's more to be said on this whole matter, but I'll save it for future posts.
Their image, huh? Your question bothers me on so many different levels that I'm not certain where to begin, but here are some points to consider.
A.) You are part of the gay community. It's not You versus Them. And you are hardly the only gay man who believes in monogamy. Look at all the couples lining up to get married. I'd bet most of them intend to have a strictly monogamous relationship. Get past the stereotypes.
B.) AIDS/HIV affects heterosexuals as well as homosexuals. It is not a "gay" disease. Let the homophobes call it that -- you certainly shouldn't.
C.) You reveal a fair amount of self-hatred when you talk about "pigs" and gay men are "filthy." To be blunt, have you not been getting any lately? This is the kind of talk I often hear from gay men who have no love or sex lives and are, frankly, jealous of those who do. Sorry to be so blunt with you but this has to be addressed. (More on this in a future post).
D.) Whether to be monogamous and faithful or have an open relationship is a personal choice made by the two parties involved. One person -- and this is equally true in straight relationships -- may prefer a monogamous relationship and the other one does not. This leads to problems when the latter partner, gay or straight, is unfaithful. But this happens in many relationships regardless of the orientation of the individuals involved.
E.) There is a big difference between a man who is sexually active but responsible, who practices safe sex, and one who is unsafe and irresponsible. This is true of straight people as well as gay. Being sexually active does not necessarily add up to being "promiscuous," or a "sex addict" or someone who sleeps with anything that moves and is irresponsible in their sexual practices and choices. Not everyone wants to be monogamous, and I see no reason why all gay men should do so just to supposedly be accepted by a society that will hate them anyway whether they have sex with one man or many men. It is foolish to believe that if all gay people got married, adopted children, and lived monogamous relationships in the suburbs that we would find instant acceptance. Some people hate us for who we love and who we have sex with, and being "monogamous" would not change that. (And who on Earth says that all straight couples are monogamous? What a joke!)
F.) There's more to be said on this whole matter, but I'll save it for future posts.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Total Acceptance? Hardly!
I get the idea that many young gay people today think they live in a world of total acceptance. It's as if they've never heard of the ex-gay movement, the fight against gay marriage equality, the Republicans and their "family values," the fact that in some third world nations you can be put to death simply for being gay --and that you can still be fired in many states in the good ol' US of A just for being homosexual. And what about all the people who are still in the closet, using beards, on the down-low? Yes, things have improved a lot since the Stonewall riots, but why do some young people act as if gays are accepted everywhere? Are they in for a rude awakening? JS,
I'm afraid so. Older people, especially those who remember the days of raids and constant oppression and the days before hardly any public figures were out of the closet, are in a unique position. They can tell how much better things are, but their remembrance of the not-so-good old days reminds them that rights can often be a fragile thing, and a lot of bad attitudes don't go away, they just go underground. Anyone who thinks homophobia is a thing of the past is either living in fantasy land or is a fool or both.
Many younger people, especially those who work in the movement, do know that the struggle is far from other. But there are those who have loving and accepting straight friends and who live in big, comparatively liberal cities (with gay rights bills to protect them, of course) and since they've never experienced oppression in a major way, they think it's a thing of the past. Sadly, all it takes is one ugly experience -- someone hurling slur terms, a gay-bashing -- and they instantly become aware that homophobia is alive and well. Many of these people, while homosexual and out of the closet, don't have an especially strong gay identity, either. The gay cause is not their cause, more's the pity.
In a way it's good that many of these people of any age feel secure; it's better than the constant paranoia many gays used to face. The downside is that it makes them feel there's nothing left to struggle for. They see AIDS as an eighties issue (but HIV and AIDs are still with is, and still a threat), and Gay Lib as a quaint thing of the past. But there are still too many gay/homosexual people who do not feel good about, or accepting of, their sexuality, and this includes many who are out of the closet. And there are a large mass of closet cases out there who cut themselves off from gay culture, self-acceptance, and enlightenment.
The good news is that the percentage of gays who are Out and Proud is probably higher than ever before. And we continue to make advances, be it gay marriages, gay/LGBT rights bills, and so on.
But there's a looooooooooong way to go, and everyone must remember it!
I'm afraid so. Older people, especially those who remember the days of raids and constant oppression and the days before hardly any public figures were out of the closet, are in a unique position. They can tell how much better things are, but their remembrance of the not-so-good old days reminds them that rights can often be a fragile thing, and a lot of bad attitudes don't go away, they just go underground. Anyone who thinks homophobia is a thing of the past is either living in fantasy land or is a fool or both.
Many younger people, especially those who work in the movement, do know that the struggle is far from other. But there are those who have loving and accepting straight friends and who live in big, comparatively liberal cities (with gay rights bills to protect them, of course) and since they've never experienced oppression in a major way, they think it's a thing of the past. Sadly, all it takes is one ugly experience -- someone hurling slur terms, a gay-bashing -- and they instantly become aware that homophobia is alive and well. Many of these people, while homosexual and out of the closet, don't have an especially strong gay identity, either. The gay cause is not their cause, more's the pity.
In a way it's good that many of these people of any age feel secure; it's better than the constant paranoia many gays used to face. The downside is that it makes them feel there's nothing left to struggle for. They see AIDS as an eighties issue (but HIV and AIDs are still with is, and still a threat), and Gay Lib as a quaint thing of the past. But there are still too many gay/homosexual people who do not feel good about, or accepting of, their sexuality, and this includes many who are out of the closet. And there are a large mass of closet cases out there who cut themselves off from gay culture, self-acceptance, and enlightenment.
The good news is that the percentage of gays who are Out and Proud is probably higher than ever before. And we continue to make advances, be it gay marriages, gay/LGBT rights bills, and so on.
But there's a looooooooooong way to go, and everyone must remember it!
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Blacks More Homophobic?
I have heard of a report which suggests that black people are more homophobic than white. Is this true? Anon.
Actually one study suggested that white people were more accepting of gay marriage than black people. And there are (mostly white) homophobes who are saying that if gay marriage is accepted it will supposedly help deteriorate the black family because black men (I assume they mean those on the "down-low") will not marry the mothers of their children. But since most of those down-low guys (who belong to all ethnic backgrounds, not just African-American) are deeply ashamed of their homoerotic feelings one can't imagine them marrying one of the guys they have sex with.
Let's keep things in perspective. Yes, there are homophobic African-Americans, and yes there are racist gays. But there are also Out and Proud Gay African-Americans as well as many straight African-Americans who are committed to Gay Rights (just as there have been many gays who have been committed to the civil rights struggle for blacks.) The fact that some members of minority groups have issues with other minority groups should not be used as an excuse to tolerate bigotry of any kind. Gays who may have conscious or sub-conscious racist feelings should not think those feelings are justified simply because there are homophobic African-Americans.
Our Gay Black Brothers and Sisters have a tough enough time belonging to two misunderstood minority groups. Let's not make it worse for them.
As for the homophobes, whatever race they may belong to: Let's do our best to educate them, and if that doesn't work, give them a good swift kick in the pants!
Actually one study suggested that white people were more accepting of gay marriage than black people. And there are (mostly white) homophobes who are saying that if gay marriage is accepted it will supposedly help deteriorate the black family because black men (I assume they mean those on the "down-low") will not marry the mothers of their children. But since most of those down-low guys (who belong to all ethnic backgrounds, not just African-American) are deeply ashamed of their homoerotic feelings one can't imagine them marrying one of the guys they have sex with.
Let's keep things in perspective. Yes, there are homophobic African-Americans, and yes there are racist gays. But there are also Out and Proud Gay African-Americans as well as many straight African-Americans who are committed to Gay Rights (just as there have been many gays who have been committed to the civil rights struggle for blacks.) The fact that some members of minority groups have issues with other minority groups should not be used as an excuse to tolerate bigotry of any kind. Gays who may have conscious or sub-conscious racist feelings should not think those feelings are justified simply because there are homophobic African-Americans.
Our Gay Black Brothers and Sisters have a tough enough time belonging to two misunderstood minority groups. Let's not make it worse for them.
As for the homophobes, whatever race they may belong to: Let's do our best to educate them, and if that doesn't work, give them a good swift kick in the pants!
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Dressing to Advantage
Am I out of date or is there still a gay dress code, something that tells you if someone is a top or a bottom, into kinky sex, water sports, and so on? Or has all that been done away with? Don't get out to bars much these days. Anon.
I'm not saying that that's all been done away with but it does seem a little dated. I personally never ascribed to the business of dressing in a certain way or wearing certain items -- color-coded hankies in your left or right pocket and so on -- to reveal your sexual tastes. I believe that sort of thing was once more common in leather bars. If it's still practiced by some guys, I don't know.
I suppose if you wear tight jeans with a big hole cut out showing off your buns, well I'll let you guess what that means -- and I'm sure you can, even if you haven't been in a bar for awhile!
I'm not saying that that's all been done away with but it does seem a little dated. I personally never ascribed to the business of dressing in a certain way or wearing certain items -- color-coded hankies in your left or right pocket and so on -- to reveal your sexual tastes. I believe that sort of thing was once more common in leather bars. If it's still practiced by some guys, I don't know.
I suppose if you wear tight jeans with a big hole cut out showing off your buns, well I'll let you guess what that means -- and I'm sure you can, even if you haven't been in a bar for awhile!
Monday, August 11, 2008
Unrequited Love Strikes Again!
I am a 32-year-old gay man. I have a friend I'll call Harry who is 35. He has a blog and writes all the time about a man he calls Joe, with whom he is in love. Mutual friends keep telling me that I am Joe, and that Harry is totally besotted with me. I care about Harry very much, but my feelings are strictly platonic and can never be otherwise. I looked at his last blog post tonight and for the first time the blinders were off and yes it became clear to me that I am "Joe." I went back and read the other posts and really don't know what to do. Our mutual friends are correct -- Harry is completely in love with me. I'm flattered -- but I just don't feel the same. From what he says on his blog, he seems to know it's hopeless, but people keep leaving comments telling him to tell me how he feels -- that's the last thing I want. What should I do, Dr. Bill? Wish I Weren't Joe.
Well, I've been in this situation from both sides and it ain't ever easy. There are a few things to keep in mind.
1.) This is very awkward for you, yes, but his unrequited passion is probably killing Harry. I recognize he's a friend you care about and you don't want him to get hurt -- and that the last thing you want is to have that conversation where you have to let him down easy (and as I said it's never easy) -- but what you're going through is nothing compared to what he's going through. If you keep that in mind it will help you keep things in perspective.
2.) His feelings for you may be an intense infatuation but not true love. Still painful, but easier to get over. Even if it's the latter, your rejection of him won't ruin his life. He thinks it will, but more likely it won't.
3.) I would suggest not doing anything now. Even though he's posting his feelings on his blog -- maybe hoping you'll read it and tell him what he wants to hear -- that doesn't mean he wants you to confront him, especially if your feelings are not the same as his. Often people are able to work through these unrequited feelings on their own, or they realize they prefer you as a friend, or they meet and fall for somebody else. No action may be required at this point.
4.) If he does declare his feelings for you out in the open, don't freak out. Tell him how much you care about him and how much his friendship means to you. Don't give him false hope, but tell him all the things you admire about him. Say it's a shame that your feelings aren't quite the same as his, because you're probably losing out on something special. But that there's nothing you can do about chemistry or your feelings. Tell him he's attractive, but be careful not to patronize.
Some people in your situation try to keep from hurting people by saying they're not ready for a relationship, or they only like a certain type (whom they make as different from the person they're talking to as possible) or they don't want to screw up a perfect friendship and so on, but I think in the long run it's better to be honest and avoid the obfuscation.
However if you just can't bring yourself to be blunt with him, one thing you might say is that you've gotten so used to him as a friend that it would just be too strange and downright unsettling to have him for a lover. Now this might sound like pure b.s., but the fact remains that many friends who are attracted to one another don't want to take it to the next level for that very reason. It's not just that they might spoil a good friendship, but that being lovers engenders a whole new level of angst, jealousy and primal emotion. Couples who break up often think to themselves, "if only we'd just stayed friends -- or f--k buddies!"
Things may just play themselves out without your having to say anything, but if he does reveal his feelings to you, I hope I've given you some options. Remember, that he may need to end the friendship if he feels he just can't stand being around you once he realizes you'll never be lovers. People aren't being mean when they do this -- it's an acknowledgement that they can't get over you if they're around you all the time.
But maybe he'll be able to think of you just as a cherished friend, and find somebody else to share his life and bed with.
Well, I've been in this situation from both sides and it ain't ever easy. There are a few things to keep in mind.
1.) This is very awkward for you, yes, but his unrequited passion is probably killing Harry. I recognize he's a friend you care about and you don't want him to get hurt -- and that the last thing you want is to have that conversation where you have to let him down easy (and as I said it's never easy) -- but what you're going through is nothing compared to what he's going through. If you keep that in mind it will help you keep things in perspective.
2.) His feelings for you may be an intense infatuation but not true love. Still painful, but easier to get over. Even if it's the latter, your rejection of him won't ruin his life. He thinks it will, but more likely it won't.
3.) I would suggest not doing anything now. Even though he's posting his feelings on his blog -- maybe hoping you'll read it and tell him what he wants to hear -- that doesn't mean he wants you to confront him, especially if your feelings are not the same as his. Often people are able to work through these unrequited feelings on their own, or they realize they prefer you as a friend, or they meet and fall for somebody else. No action may be required at this point.
4.) If he does declare his feelings for you out in the open, don't freak out. Tell him how much you care about him and how much his friendship means to you. Don't give him false hope, but tell him all the things you admire about him. Say it's a shame that your feelings aren't quite the same as his, because you're probably losing out on something special. But that there's nothing you can do about chemistry or your feelings. Tell him he's attractive, but be careful not to patronize.
Some people in your situation try to keep from hurting people by saying they're not ready for a relationship, or they only like a certain type (whom they make as different from the person they're talking to as possible) or they don't want to screw up a perfect friendship and so on, but I think in the long run it's better to be honest and avoid the obfuscation.
However if you just can't bring yourself to be blunt with him, one thing you might say is that you've gotten so used to him as a friend that it would just be too strange and downright unsettling to have him for a lover. Now this might sound like pure b.s., but the fact remains that many friends who are attracted to one another don't want to take it to the next level for that very reason. It's not just that they might spoil a good friendship, but that being lovers engenders a whole new level of angst, jealousy and primal emotion. Couples who break up often think to themselves, "if only we'd just stayed friends -- or f--k buddies!"
Things may just play themselves out without your having to say anything, but if he does reveal his feelings to you, I hope I've given you some options. Remember, that he may need to end the friendship if he feels he just can't stand being around you once he realizes you'll never be lovers. People aren't being mean when they do this -- it's an acknowledgement that they can't get over you if they're around you all the time.
But maybe he'll be able to think of you just as a cherished friend, and find somebody else to share his life and bed with.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Slander?
What do you think of gay people who insist that certain people who are straight are really gay? Is it fair of them to slander these people by insisting that they're gay? Do you think that's right? Anon.
Slander??? I reject your whole premise. Unless you think there's something wrong with being gay -- which I certainly don't -- then a person is hardly committing slander by suggesting that someone is homosexual. There is a big difference between a homophobic person "accusing" someone of being gay or someone suggesting someone is gay as a way of putting them down (as if being gay is something to be ashamed of) and someone who is either gay or supportive of gays suggesting that a certain individual might be gay in a non-judgmental way.
I don't think it's right to say that someone is definitely gay when you don't know for sure (and certainly if you know or think the person is genuinely heterosexual) because a.) it's inaccurate and b.) it could lead to discrimination against that person (although some people think every straight person should walk in our shoes for awhile ... )
Sadly, today you can be accused of libel or slander for saying someone is gay if they're not (or even if they are, in which case you better have plenty of their same-sex partners available to testify on your behalf), even if you yourself are gay or pro-gay. Homosexuality is still considered something dirty, a filthy little secret, by far too many people.
On American Idol judge Simon Cowell was always "gay-baiting" host Ryan Seacrest by passing remarks suggesting he was homosexual (in time Seacrest did the same to Cowell). It was not only offensive and homophobic, but it added nothing of intelligence to America's discussion of homosexuality and perpetuated the stereotype that being gay is something negative. Just as bad, people theorized that Cowell had to be gay himself because he was "bitchy," another stereotype applied to homosexual men. To suggest that all gay men are big bitches is as ludicrous as suggesting that no straight men can be "bitchy" -- and they can be, believe me!
Gay people often wonder about or suggest someone straight-identified is gay because we know that even in the 21st century there are a great many homosexual people in the closet, leading straight lives, on the down-low, or who consider themselves heterosexual even though they have same-sex encounters on a regular basis. You''ll have to forgive me if I'm a bit cynical (or realistic) on the subject, but I've had years of experience.
Besides, how do you know we're wrong when we say someone you think is straight is really gay?
Maybe we know more than you do?
Slander??? I reject your whole premise. Unless you think there's something wrong with being gay -- which I certainly don't -- then a person is hardly committing slander by suggesting that someone is homosexual. There is a big difference between a homophobic person "accusing" someone of being gay or someone suggesting someone is gay as a way of putting them down (as if being gay is something to be ashamed of) and someone who is either gay or supportive of gays suggesting that a certain individual might be gay in a non-judgmental way.
I don't think it's right to say that someone is definitely gay when you don't know for sure (and certainly if you know or think the person is genuinely heterosexual) because a.) it's inaccurate and b.) it could lead to discrimination against that person (although some people think every straight person should walk in our shoes for awhile ... )
Sadly, today you can be accused of libel or slander for saying someone is gay if they're not (or even if they are, in which case you better have plenty of their same-sex partners available to testify on your behalf), even if you yourself are gay or pro-gay. Homosexuality is still considered something dirty, a filthy little secret, by far too many people.
On American Idol judge Simon Cowell was always "gay-baiting" host Ryan Seacrest by passing remarks suggesting he was homosexual (in time Seacrest did the same to Cowell). It was not only offensive and homophobic, but it added nothing of intelligence to America's discussion of homosexuality and perpetuated the stereotype that being gay is something negative. Just as bad, people theorized that Cowell had to be gay himself because he was "bitchy," another stereotype applied to homosexual men. To suggest that all gay men are big bitches is as ludicrous as suggesting that no straight men can be "bitchy" -- and they can be, believe me!
Gay people often wonder about or suggest someone straight-identified is gay because we know that even in the 21st century there are a great many homosexual people in the closet, leading straight lives, on the down-low, or who consider themselves heterosexual even though they have same-sex encounters on a regular basis. You''ll have to forgive me if I'm a bit cynical (or realistic) on the subject, but I've had years of experience.
Besides, how do you know we're wrong when we say someone you think is straight is really gay?
Maybe we know more than you do?
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Casual versus Anonymous
You recently answered a question about casual sex. Isn't it true that casual sex and anonymous sex are not the same thing? K.
Good point. When we refer to casual sex we are generally talking about sex between two people who don't know each other very well and who are probably not in love and may not even be romantically involved -- but they can be. They have made no commitment to one another. They may or may not be dating. They may have had sex at the end of a first date. They may have met at a bar, conversed, made out, then gone home for sex. But they introduce themselves to one another. Even when people meet online and hook up strictly for sex, they generally exchange names (but not always -- and sometimes the names are not real.)
Anonymous sex, especially if we're talking about certain kinds of homosexual men, is when you don't have a conversation or introduce yourself -- there really is total anonymity. You may not even get a good look at the other person. This kind of sex takes place in the darkened rows of porn movie houses, in outdoor cruise spots generally in wooded areas, men's rooms, truck stops, alley ways. I suppose it's possible for a man to have anonymous sex and run into a sex partner in the daylight and not know who he is.
May I say, without sounding too judgmental (why everyone knows Dr. Bill is never judgmental, LOL), that anonymous sex is kind of pre-Stonewall in my opinion. I won't say that everyone who practices it is an ashamed closet queen -- sometimes it just horny guys wanting a quick fix -- but its practitioners do tend to be the kind who like to stay in the figurative and literal shadows. Many of the husbands and daddies who want sex with other guys are into anonymous sex. They have no gay identity or pride whatsoever.
There was a time when it was thought by many people that anonymous sex was all that gay men were capable of, that they couldn't make commitments or fall in love. That, of course, has always been nonsense, as there have been long-term relationships in the gay male (and lesbian) communities for decades. I would dare say that most anonymous sex isn't even practiced by "gay" men, but but bi/homosexual men who think of themselves as being "straight." (Larry Craig, caught in the men's room, is a good example of this.)
Lastly, I think most genuinely straight guys would love it if they could get more anonymous sex (with women). No wining and dining and talking about feelings and that sort of thing, ha!
Good point. When we refer to casual sex we are generally talking about sex between two people who don't know each other very well and who are probably not in love and may not even be romantically involved -- but they can be. They have made no commitment to one another. They may or may not be dating. They may have had sex at the end of a first date. They may have met at a bar, conversed, made out, then gone home for sex. But they introduce themselves to one another. Even when people meet online and hook up strictly for sex, they generally exchange names (but not always -- and sometimes the names are not real.)
Anonymous sex, especially if we're talking about certain kinds of homosexual men, is when you don't have a conversation or introduce yourself -- there really is total anonymity. You may not even get a good look at the other person. This kind of sex takes place in the darkened rows of porn movie houses, in outdoor cruise spots generally in wooded areas, men's rooms, truck stops, alley ways. I suppose it's possible for a man to have anonymous sex and run into a sex partner in the daylight and not know who he is.
May I say, without sounding too judgmental (why everyone knows Dr. Bill is never judgmental, LOL), that anonymous sex is kind of pre-Stonewall in my opinion. I won't say that everyone who practices it is an ashamed closet queen -- sometimes it just horny guys wanting a quick fix -- but its practitioners do tend to be the kind who like to stay in the figurative and literal shadows. Many of the husbands and daddies who want sex with other guys are into anonymous sex. They have no gay identity or pride whatsoever.
There was a time when it was thought by many people that anonymous sex was all that gay men were capable of, that they couldn't make commitments or fall in love. That, of course, has always been nonsense, as there have been long-term relationships in the gay male (and lesbian) communities for decades. I would dare say that most anonymous sex isn't even practiced by "gay" men, but but bi/homosexual men who think of themselves as being "straight." (Larry Craig, caught in the men's room, is a good example of this.)
Lastly, I think most genuinely straight guys would love it if they could get more anonymous sex (with women). No wining and dining and talking about feelings and that sort of thing, ha!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)