 by Brian Juergens
Video Blogs
TV Shows:
Find Articles On:
Who's onlineThere are currently 35 members and 990 guests online.
|
Spencer from "Survivor" talks strategy, thanks God he doesn't sound too gay
Ah, youth. The new season of Survivor starts tonight, and RealityBlurred has an interesting interview up with Spencer, this season's gay castaway who also happens to be the youngest player in the show's history. The youth element actually makes itself fairly self-evident when Spencer discusses his predecessors, gay and straight, from earlier seasons, which is seasoned with profanity and insults rather than wisdom. But hey, we've all been there, right? One moment that is a bit troubling, though, comes at the very end of the interview, when Spencer sets himself apart from other gay players (except for JP, who wasn't out at the time) by stressing how straight-acting he is. Let's just say he could use a little sensitivity training:
Thank God is right! We should all be so lucky to have a parent who would keep us locked in the attic if we showed even a hint of a lisp or let slip a showtune in the shower. Kid, a word of advice: The fact that people can't tell at first glance that you're gay doesn't make you any more of a man or any less of a homosexual. The sooner you accept that and move on, the better for everyone. And be careful what you say now — if you come back for an All-Star season all the other gay castaways may zhuzh you within an inch of your life. One last thing: If you haven't yet, be sure to cast your votes in our first Top Gay Reality Stars poll over on the main page. Did Spencer just take himself out of the running? Submitted by on Thu, 2009-02-12 10:02. |
 Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|
Welcome to AfterElton.com!
- Login
- Join Now!
News, Reviews & Commentary on Gay and Bisexual Men in Entertainment and the Media
What an ass. Thanks Spencer
What an ass. Thanks Spencer (and Brian!) for giving me a reason not to watch this tired show.
Besides, American Idol seems to have enough gay representation for the next few months for me. I'm counting at least 6 if my gaydar isn't deceiving me. Who knows how open they'll be, though.
Even more troubling ...
Uck
Get rid of him!
Thank God Ugly Betty is on, and I don't have to watch this ass. I'd probably be throwing my Ziggy Stardust Boots and chunks of Mascara at the TV.
That`s disappointing....
I can`t believe some of the things that came out of his mouth,yuck!
I do think he is too young and hopefully will learn a lesson or two from this experience.What he said about some of the past gay contestant is not cool,at least Todd have a million, Coby got a baby girl with his new friend`s name,and Charlie got Marcus!I doubt he can beat any of it.
OK I just read the whole interview and listen to the audio clip
Gotta say some some of his comments are a bit taken out of the context...After listen to the audio clip,part of me kinda get what he came from.Back in last season,from what I know,there were quite a few folks on some of the survivor fansites,going very strongly against the whole Charlie & Marcus hobromance thing,using some of the most nasty words I`ve ever heard in my life to insult them.And a lot of them were actually gay.
Oh,btw,I happen to really adore Shi-Ann.She was not that bright the first time but in All-Stars she was truly amazing,I still can`t forget that "in your face" individual immunity challenge win.And she did a few very smart move which ended up help her winning a car.
Take away his Gay Card!!!
If there's one thing I cannot stand, it's the blatant homophobia within the gay community itself. I am of course talking about those gay men who like to describe themselves as not "fem" and like to rely on "straight-acting". Excuse me sir, but you like to take it up the &*$!!! You cannot claim anything straight about yourself!
It just angers me how much these gay men can call themselves part of the community when they're not willing to accept all parts of it, including the fem, lip-gloss wearing guys. We all get hated on in the world, don't bring that into the community.
Read the Article; Still Very Bad
I just read the article and from what I can tell from the written words the kid has diarrhea of the mouth; he doesn't seem to think at all about the implications of what he says.
With his obviously anti-femme views and self-interested chauvinism, I'm bracing myself for the kind of insensitive and misinformed remarks that make shows like Big Brother actively dangerous to watch.
He may not sound gay, but
He may not sound gay, but when AE showed the list of male contestants & said that 1 of them was a 'mo, I knew it was this kid.
As Jon Stewart once said about Ted Haggard, "You can't run away from gay."
Huh
I don't know what you guys are talking about.
Locking a kid up in an attic, possibly with some chains, and then beating the feminine out of him? I was under the impression that that's what good parenting was all about: accepting the gay. Just not the girly boy. Most of the time imprissonment and violence are just the answer to that.
;0)
playing devil's advocate...
Why do we tolerate--or even support--femininity within the gay male community? Not necessarily the nurturing and creative facets of femininity, but the more negative stereotypes that have perpetrated our community: gossiping, shallowness, submissiveness, passivity, weakness, fashion-obsessiveness, judgmental behavior and so forth.
Much of AfterElton.com's content deals with challenging and denouncing the overrepresentation of gay men in media with the stereotypical lisping, "flaming" portrayals. Ultimately, the community largely shares a distaste for the feminine. Spencer expressed this common feeling, perhaps just more callously than many of us would prefer.
Maybe I'm too young to understand the significance of integrating the drag community within ours or the pervasiveness of (what I consider regressive) butch-femme relationships, but I'm happily experiencing a generation of gay men reclaiming their masculinity and lesbians reclaiming their femininity. Sorry we're not radical enough for some of the Stonewallers, but this is who I am.
The Stonewall riots...
were led by drag queens. Every macho, hairy-chested, muscle-bound, perma-tanned sex-god who can pass as straight should get down on his knees and say thank you to the first drag queen who kicked off her stilletoes and said 'Hell, no. I'm not taking this any more'. When that drag queen and the others started fighting back against the police raid on the Stonewall Inn back in 1969, they violently kickstarted a call for equality that is still having reverberations around the world. It was a bunch of dispossessed trannies, rent-boys, butch bull-dykes and similar cliches of the gay and lesbian world - not the straight-acting gays and lesbians - who started the fight that has resulted in (among other things) the freedom to have an internet board upon which you can comment on them.
For all his macho talk and muscular appearance, Spencer wouldn't last two seconds if faced by a couple of irate drag queens. Despite the glitter and glad-rags, it takes real personal strength to go out into the big wide world and identify yourself as being 'other' and out of the norm. In too many cases, to be so obviously identified as limp-wristed or 'too feminine' or in any way different results in massive amounts of abuse - physical, personal and emotional. Would you have the strength to deal with that day after day? I know I wouldn't.
Just before a major (and successful) battle against Napoleon, the Duke of Wellington surveryed his troops and said: 'I don't know what they do to the enemy, but, by God, they scare me'. And that's how I feel sometimes about various groupings within the gay and lesbian 'community'. I don't understand all the different behaviours and philosophies of life, but I am eternally grateful they exist because I know if I had that battalion of diversity arraigned against me - rather than with me - I wouldn't stand a chance.
Your devil's advocate argument is for conformity, not equality. And your argument never works. Women never got the vote by trying to be men. Racial minorities in the West never gained any form of equality by pretending to be white. Jews, muslims, hindus Buddhists, zoroastrians, wiccans or whoever, have never gained any quantum of equality of religious belief by trying to pass as Southern Baptist or Lutheran or Catholic or Methodist or Greek Orthodox or whatever.
You are what you are. Ultimately that's how you have to be accepted if you want to be equal. And that goes just as much for you in your behaviour as it does for the acid-tongued bitch in ripped-off Vera Wang on stage or the lisping. pastel-pink bedecked stereotype of an interior designer. They're as good as you or me - so don't forget it.
To use an archaic, religious
CHURCH!
and HOLLA!
You said a mouthful sugar!
"Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." (Dorothy Parker)
Trumped Up Sexistist, Self-Hating Garbage
Do you understand the words that are coming out of your mouth? Who are you or anyone else to get to TOLERATE gay people being part of the gay community. If we have to TOLERATE gay republicans who support anti-gay organizations, then you have to TOLERATE sissies! END OF!
What exactly makes you think that you have to be "feminine" to behave like the above? I have heard many a "straight-acting" man on this site out-bitch the bitchiest queens. What is "snark" if not bitchiness?
"The community"? Which "community" is that? The heterosexist, homophobic, neanderthal frat boy straight men's "community" that's hanging out in the parking lots of gay bars just swinging their bats and waiting for a fag to bash?
Spencer may be young but its 2009 and he's not stupid. There is NO EXCUSE for his behavior or words. He knows better. He is not 12. He's pandering and should be called out on it and raked over the coals about it until he CRIES!!!!!
Instead of sending him to the Ponderosa when he get's kicked off, they need to dump his self-hating arse in the work room at RuPaul's Drag Race and let him spew that venom and see how long he gets to feel like THE MAN!
"Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." (Dorothy Parker)
If someone said I was
Straight looking?
You would be happy not to
You would be happy not to be seen as stereotype or as gay because it sounds to me you the latter is true.Effemininity is NOT the stereotype in facted i think the straight-acting gay are the stereotype,i think nether is bad you are who you are but to be proud to not be seen as gay is pathetic.But what bothers me the most is that some of these straight-acting gays somehow feel superior to others because they THINK they are a role-model that all other gays should follow.This is a attitude i HATE!!!I think drag-queens are the bravest gays around,i would not have the guts to dress up but i i greatly respect there bravery surtanly alot more then the so called straight-acting gays especially when they say they are proud to be soo straight acting.
PRIDE:
I'm not sure you know the definition of stereotype
I'm not sure you know the definition of "stereotype".
Perhaps you're trying to say that in reality, more gay men would tend to fall into the "straight-acting" sub-group rather than the more effeminite sub-group which many in the general population seem to believe is representative of most gays.
...
Allow me to open up a bit to explain some of my intentionally provocative and admittedly hurtful comments. I've come to understand myself as a sort of unassuming sexist, which is why I find some typically feminine traits to be distasteful.
When I first was coming to terms with my sexuality, the few gay men that were visible to me were the stereotypical, flamboyant types. It really made my acceptance of myself that much more difficult, because I couldn't relate to these guys and couldn't identify my struggle with theirs. Since then, I've happily found a huge community of exceptional guys that I can really consider brothers in the face of adversity. Unfortunately, femme bashing is still common within this circle.
A large part of it is perception. I (and many of my friends) resent the idea that we're "acting." That deep down we just want to let our inner diva scream. That deep down we yearn to be...girls. It's uncomfortable and stifling having these misconceptions be directed at us.
My old theory was that gender noncomformity was somehow Darwinian...i.e., being a super flamboyant guy or a big bulldyke cuts out the are-they-gay-guessing-game of romantic and sexual pursuits. Doubt this is true, but I'm still not sure where sexual orientation and gender intersects.
I'm deeply sorry if I offended anyone, but ultimately, I get where Spencer is coming from: the idea that we're men who like men, and we don't have to compromise our masculinity in the process.
That's fine -- except never
Be the person you are
Be as proud of your "straight acting" demeanour as any "flaming drag queen" is proud of hers. Be what makes you feel most comfortable and if anyone, gay or straight, has a problem with it then tell them where they can go - if you know what I mean.
I grew up a member of the only black family in what was then a small Canadian town but, as my well educated parents taught me, that is irrelevant - I'm no better or worse than anyone else. I grew up to speak like my family and friends, dress like my family and friends, develop a taste for the same music, play the same games. We share the same values and view the world from a similar perspective. I am a product of all my experiences and I'm proud of who they have made me. However, there are those out there who think I am not what I should be, people who grew up in neighbourhoods wholly unlike my home town. They grew up to speak and dress a different way, listen to other musics and play unfamiliar games. Unfortunately, that is what's irrelevant to them. They believe that because I share their skin tone I should also share their beliefs and outlook. They refuse to accept who I am and instead accuse my demeanour as some kind of act, a performance that is a manifestation of my refusal to accept who they think I must truly be. In their words: "You're not black enough!" I've been called an "Oreo cookie", a race-traitor and worse. They fail to acknowledge their own prejudices while pointed out other's. To them I say if it is an "Oreo-cookie" that they see then I'm proud to be one. Why wouldn't I be!
I relay the above as an example, an opportunity to see the issue from another angle, because I often get the exact same treatment from members of the gay community. They believe that because you share their sexual orientation that you also MUST share their values and politics. Everything that made you who you are today is irrelevant to them. In their words: "You're not gay enough!" Overlooking their own while ascribing prejudice to others, the words "straight acting" drips off their tongues like venom off a snake's.
Don't listen to them. Have no guilt in liking the things you like and disliking the things you don't. If you are comfortable with labels and feel "straight acting" best describes who you are then I say "Good on you, kid!" Wear that badge with pride! And to all the people out there, GAY OR STRIAGHT, who want to tell you what to like and what not to like, how to behave and how not to behave or even who to be and who not to be, tell them proudly and confidently: "GO TO ..." - well, you know what I mean.
Wearing labels
Spencer - and anyone else - is welcome to wear whatever label they want in describing their sexuality. What they're not able to do without reprisal is denigrate someone else because of their mannerisms or voice or choice of clothes or taste in music. If you're a man and you prefer having sex with other men, then you're gay. How you choose to express that behaviour - if at all - is up to you.
That doesn't give Spencer - or anyone else - licence to abuse other gay men because they behave differently. This is especially since the very people he seems to be trying to distance himself from are the exact same people who fought to give him the rights to be an openly gay man in the first place.
Spencer can say whatever the hell he likes - that's free speech. But then he can be critcised for it by others. That's free speech, too.
Having said all that, as Ed wisely pointed out above, Spencer is still young and finding his way in the world. One just hopes he won't be as dismissive of other gay men when he gets older.
My comment was directed at Dan, not Spencer.
As you and others have noted, Spencer is young. He needs to learn that pride in one's self does not equate to superiority over others. That is the core idea of my statements.
Nowhere in my statements do I advocate discrimination. Quite the contrary, I hope to highlight the tendency, even here among these comments, for people to attack anyone who does not subscribe to some perceived norm - in this case, pride in one's "straightness" if that is how one sees himself.
Some of the commentators here should carefully reread their statements and consider who is ALSO judging whom!
Discriminatory, abusive, condescension
But the comments - made by Dan - that you are defending are clearly discriminating, abusive and condescending. In his second sentence he dismisses as 'negative' men who gossip, follow fashion, are passive or weak. Without a hint of irony, he then condemns those men for being 'judgmental'.
Setting up an entirely false paradigm between what is 'masculine' and what is 'feminine' he then goes on to express his pride in 'a generation of gay men reclaiming their masculinity and lesbians reclaiming their femininity'. That statement alone is jaw-droppingly ignorant of the history of gay men: Alexander the Great some mincing queen? Shaka Zulu some flaming faggot? Julius Caesar some pastel-toned shrinking violet?
But Dan seems to be suggesting that his model of a somehow new and 'masculine' gay man is superior to all others. That is mind-blowingly condescending.
He fails to clearly define his concept of masculinity except by stating what it isn't: flaming, flamboyant, lisping and all the rest. If strength is one of his definitions of masculinity - and it seems to be because he dismisses weakness as a negative, then his argument falls apart immediately.
Just as gay history contains its testosterone-dripping generals, kings and emperors, it also long lists of drag queens, weak and non-conformists who haven't been as celebrated (although some have: for example, father of two Oscar Wilde is still seen as the epitome of the bitchy, camp fop). If survival is strength, then the 'femme' (his description) is just as successful as the 'butch'. They've existed for as long as each other. He mentioned Darwin in a second post and then skipped over a blindingly obbvious conclusion that if you accept survival of the fittest, the femme are just as fit as the butch.
If he means something as mundane as physical strength, then it's just a ridiculous argument. A weakling can be straight-acting, a drag queen can be a gym trainer. There's no rhyme or reason to making an argument about physical strength - or masculinity - based on the number of sequins on a frock.
As I said before, Dan's argument is for conformity, not equality. The problem with conformity is that you immediately have to start juding others and deciding what is a positive trait and what is negative. Throughout, Dan states the negative and cheerily admits to his membership of a group of people who 'bash' others. He seems to accept that bashing other people is not a good thing, but refrains from saying whether he challenges it when it arises or distances himself from the bashers. You're a gay man, I'm a gay man, Dan is a gay man, Carson Creswell is a gay man, Ian McKellan is a gay man, Clay Aiken is a gay man, John Barrowman is a gay man - which one of us needs another basher?
You're telling him to have pride in his 'straightness'. But he's not straight is he? He sleeps with other men. That's called being gay.
They're here! They're straight-acting! Get use to it!
But the comments - made by Dan - that you are defending are clearly discriminating, abusive and condescending.
... Yada, yada yada ...
You're telling him to have pride in his 'straightness'. But he's not straight is he? He sleeps with other men. That's called being gay.
Why are you so intent on assigning arguments to my words that clearly are not there??? I did not offer one syllable of support for any discriminating statement by Dan. I barely spoke to his comments in any way, shape or form. Likewise I never told Dan "to have pride in his 'straightness.'" I encourage him to not be afraid to take pride in his natural self. ("straight-ACTING" as he wants to describe it but a misnomer since, hopefully, he is not acting) My ONLY intent was to offer him that advice since, as he has here, he will continue to encounter people who'll attack him because of what he likes or dislikes, or who he is or isn't.
I have no fondness for rap-culture, urban slang or the company of those that insist that I do. It's not what I grew up with and not something I want to incorporate into my present life and NO ONE, not you or anyone else out there, has the right to insist that I should! With that in mind, why do you think you have the right to tell Dan that he must like femininity in males? If he HASN'T INTERFERED with their lives then why interfere with his? It is in this same vein of thinking that I acknowledge that straight people don't have to like gays, they just have to stop meddling in our affairs. Dan doesn't have to like fem's, he just has to in no way impede their lives. Discrimination is not an emotion (like or dislike), it is an action (interference)!
When the forces of oppression come to you and say you must like this trait and dislike that one, what will you tell them? "It's okay for me decree what is proper but not you" ???
Dan seems to be just as young as Spencer and the insensitivity of their words has been examined ad infinitum. No need to beat that dead horse. However, these forums can be just as oppressive as anything expressed by Dan or Spenser. My hope is that as these two young soles continue to develop their feel for the world that they also manage to resist the hypocritical influences they will must definitely face.
Just wanted to let you know...
Have you read your own comments?
You are constantly telling Dan to have pride in himself. He describes himself as an unassuming sexist and hangs round with a group that in some way 'bashes' other people. Your response to that is: 'Be the person you are ... despite what you hear outside the gay community OR WITHIN IT!!!.' You say you don't condone discrimination, and then say: 'Have no guilt in liking the things you like and disliking the things you don't'. This is after he's admited to discrimination.
I don't care whether someone is more straight-acting than Hercules or the most flaming thing to walk the earth. In a similar fashion, I don't give a damn whether you revel in urban slang and rap culture or abhor it. It's up to you and doesn't impinge on my life.
However, if Dan (who I quite admire for saying what he thinks) or anyone else discriminates against other gay men for something as ridiculous as appearance or mannerism, then he can be criticised. You seem to think that if someone is being criticised, then they're automatically being forced to think something different. No one can police another person's unexpresed thoughts, but once they put their philosophy out there, others can disagree. That disagreement doesn't amount to a 'decree' by someone else (as you seem to think), it is what it is - disagreement.
My last reply.
You are constantly telling Dan to have pride in himself. He describes himself as an unassuming sexist and hangs round with a group that in some way 'bashes' other people. Your response to that is: 'Be the person you are ... despite what you hear outside the gay community OR WITHIN IT!!!.'
Telling Dan to have pride in himself is not to say that he doesn't have room for improvement. It's a pretty high standard if the only people who can have pride in themselves are those who are without flaw.
You say you don't condone discrimination, and then say: 'Have no guilt in liking the things you like and disliking the things you don't'. This is after he's admited to discrimination.
Once again, discrimination is not an emotion, a preference or taste, it is an action! I happen not to like tall or skinny guys. Give me them short and stocky. (Grrrr!) Am I "discriminating" against tall, skinny men? What about women? Am I "discriminating" against them too? Now, if you are saying that I am such a wondrous gift to mankind that it's my responsibility to share my glorious acquaintance with everyone then, though deeply flattered, I would still disagree. I am responsible for no one's fulfilment but my own. What little I may have is mine to offer, not someone else's to demand. That's not to say that gives me the right to go around belittling or discriminating against those that don't meet my taste, nor do my statements advocate such behaviour despite your persistent charges that they do. And I certainly would never express support for Dan supposition that femininity should not be TOLERATED within the gay male community since INTOLERANCE IMPLIES INTERFERENCE which indeed would be discrimination.
My comments to Dan were never about HIS words, they only spoke of the words of OTHERS! You seem unwilling to recognize the difference in topic between my statement and Dan's. It is as if things must be one dimensional - Dan said "X" and thus is a horrid person. Any words to him that are not a vile repudiation must therefore be a declaration of solidarity with every word he's said. - Well, I don't think that way and even though I may disagree with him and wish he thought differently, I do want to reassure him that he is still free to like and dislike whatever he wants regardless of whether others like it or not. Too few people are willing to concede that fact. Dislike is not hate! Dislike is not homophobia! Don't allow others to manipulate you into thinking otherwise.
You seem to think that if someone is being criticized, then they're automatically being forced to think something different.
No one can police another person's unexpresed thoughts, but once they put their philosophy out there, others can disagree. That disagreement doesn't amount to a 'decree' by someone else (as you seem to think), it is what it is - disagreement.
You sure do have a propensity for reading things that are not there. Where did I say that criticism is force or that disagreement amounts to a decree? Honestly, did I write that? All these machinations do not befit a response. Put aside your cynicism and read my words yet again!
Love the hyperbole!
I love the hyperbole of your responses. Sincerely, it's great!
On pride and discrimination: yes, if someone has something worth being proud about, then it should be recognised. (Dan can be proud that he said what he thought and thus sparked off such a lively debate.) This is the first post in which you've suggested he should have any limits on that pride, given his prejudices. And yes, I do understand the meaning of discrimination - in both its positive and negative connotations - and have used it correctly in every instance.
Until you said otherwise, the inferrence that you supported in some form - or were prepared to ignore - Dan's prejudices is entirely natural. Thank you for the clarification.
I don't think Dan, you or anyone else is one-dimensional. I have no idea where you got that idea from. For the record, I like the existence of diversity in humanity, even if I don't always like some philosophies or the way they are expressed. On that note, I can't find any record of anyone telling Dan that he couldn't think what he thinks; there were some posts opposing him, some posts supporting him. That his views have been discussed from such a variety of angles suggests that freedom of thought is an integral aspect of the debate as far as all other posters are concerned. As a result, I can't understand why you think freedom of thought is such an issue. Oh well.
Very briefly, on decrees and force. You wrote: 'When the forces of oppression come to you and say you must like this trait and dislike that one, what will you tell them? "It's okay for me decree what is proper but not you".' I just used your own phrase because you seemed comfortable with it. Clearly I was mistaken and therefore apologise.
...
Can you thow your head back and say...
... I'm Ma-ha-ha-ha-ha-had!
I don't totally hate when people call themselves straight acting, but it does make me cringe. I mean, the intention always seems to be that they are somehow better, when the emphasis for me isn't on the word 'straight' but the word 'acting.'
I don't remember 'straight acting' being said so much when I was first coming up. People said they were fem or butch. When I hear "straight acting," I think "closet case."
But it is shameful to pat yourself on the shoulder, wanting to believe you are some how above everyone else who shares the same human condition we call homosexuality.
Understanding
I must say that I kind of understand where Spencer is coming from. I sometimes (and only within my own mind) feel resentful of gay men who are very overly feminine. However, I'm not thanking God that I don't sound like that.
I will say that most people would probably describe me as "straight-acting" but it's not because I'm necessarily butch. It would more to do with the fact that I'm a big, lazy, slob who would rather listen to Don Imus and go to a football or baseball game than go dancing at a club.
I keep thinking about this
I think the thing that irritates me the most about such a value being placed on straight-actingness (and the various levels of scorn for effeminacy) is that I'm already afraid enough to go out as I am and interact with the straght people in the world. I really shouldn't feel the need to be concerned with that fear within the gay community too.
Yes, I know we're all different and have our own ways of looking at the world, but I do tend to hope for at least a little understanding and acceptance from a group who intimately knows what it is to feel "other." That he felt the need to express that thought out loud just makes me hope Spencer finds time soon to grow up a little more.
Double Standard When It Comes to Queenieness
Many of the writers of A.E. and many of the frequent posters on this site say awful, mean-spririted, nasty self-hating things about men who are not masculine all the time.
People say it about fictional characters AND real gay men on tv and no one every calls anyone out or bats an eyelash.
But let some straight guy use "limp wrist" as an insult or some knuckle-dragging, pandering gay men make "nelly comments" on a reality show and all hell breaks loose.
It's like some weird internalized fear of feminiity in men that only serves to make it HARDER for gay men to be themselves
If you're a masculine man or a feminine man you should get to be your happy gay self and we as a community need to support each other's freely expressing who we are. That is REAL liberation.
Don't men get that the constant obsession with masculinity (as determined by straight men) just makes it that much harder for younger men to come out and feel comfortable with themselves?
I have never understood it and I have no desire to understand it because it IS self-hating.
If straight people choose to believe (despite the obvious evidence to the contrary in 2009) that all gay men behave in any particularly kind of way, that is their WILLFUL ignorance and not our responsibilty to enlighten them.
The logic that flamey gay men somehow makes non-flamey gay men look "bad" is not only ridiculous, it is offensive and homophobic.
It is horrifying to read some of the comments that folks just let loose with here in the comments sections and also in the articles written for the site.
Case in point: The gay couple on "The Secret Life of Teenagers" who could not be more sweet and loving and real (to me) get verbally bashed as stereotypes because they aren't he-men crotch scratchers in the same breath as the writer is saying he's happy to see a loving gay couple presented as potential adoptees of the baby. WTF?
I don't know what world folks are living in but the gay world I live in takes all kinds.
And it's not even consistent. Some of the same men on this site who complain that gay men in films and television are obsessed with fashion and shopping, etc turn on a dime and make comments about how "no self-respecting gay men would be seen" in a an untidy apartement or wearing a bad outfit AND/OR inply that straight men who aren't super masculine MUST be closeted (Real World Morman anyone?)
Dykes are just as bad, trust me.
Since when did we become so complicit in our own oppression?
"Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." (Dorothy Parker)
People are people
I can definitely see the negative side to the term "straight-acting". It seems to imply that to act straight is "better" in someway, and heterosexism like that should be wiped out. But, on the other hand, perhaps we should take a step back and merely look at the term as a statement of fact, and not a judgement. Perhaps by straight-acting one simply implies that they don't fit into the "gay" stereotype, whatever that may be.
I think the real problem here is our tendency to over-rely on stereotypes, be they straight, gay or whatever. I truly believe people are people are people, and that we should not make any assumptions about them before we get to know them. That's why I kinda resent the idea of gaydar. Yes, there have been moments where mine has "gone off", and I've thought "that person is probably gay." Perhaps it is the remnant of some biological function used for mating purposes (at least in the case of women). But, even when I have these moments, I NEVER assume a person's sexuality. If they tell me they are straight, I will believe them until told otherwise.
Gender expression is so much more complicated than the binary system we attach to it. I'll use myself as an example. I have short hair (currently), I tend to wear baggy clothes, and I have "guy interests" (sports, action movies, comic books, etc). In general I am more of a tom-boy than a girly girl. Because of this (and the fact that I actively support gay rights), people have labelled me as a lesbian. Is this fair? No. Am I offended? Yes. I am NOT offended because people think I'm gay; I really couldn't care less. I am offended that their opinion of me is based on such trivial aspects of myself. All you have to do is walk into my room and see the posters on my wall to know that I am straight. (Or to be fair, at least bisexual).
Spencer sees feminine qualities as negative. Perhaps he sees them in himself and dislikes them, wanting to fit in with "the norm" but perhaps not. Perhaps he is simply an ignorant young man (those two adjectives being seperate and not co-dependant on the other) who as yet to learn that people come in all shapes, sizes, colours, genders, flavours and varieties. If he identifies as being "straight-acting" well, good for him, so long as he is not really acting and is being honest about himself. But that does not give him the right to judge and put down others who don't share his gender expression.
I may be straight, but I'm not narrow.
Ha
lol,
sorry! but I liked your wording better than mine. Nice to know I'm not the only one who thinks gaydar is outdated.
I may be straight, but I'm not narrow.
Any gay community secret
Gaydar
We have an awesome gay community. Diversity of thought. Diversity of types. Diversity of gender identification and sexuality. Diversity of politics. Diversity of tastes. Diversity of a willingness to respect others' opinions. Same as them straight folk.
And yet, for all the pros and cons of this whole straight-acting and butch/fem spectrum debate, we have this cute little in-joke in our community. It's called gaydar. The observation by which we judge another's unknown sexuality based on traits such as the way they walk or talk or with whom they associate. I'm guilty of it. Are you?
It's important to remember that communities are best when they are not homogenous. After all, doesn't our community expect tolerance and respect? How can we ask it from others if we don't grant it within our own community?
"Far-from-perfect"ly yours,
Zam
Think about this phrase:
To Gay for the Straight Guys to Straight for the Gay Guys
I have to say I go from what is considered masculine to feminine from day to day. Sometimes I will get scruffy, grow my beard long and sit on the couch with a beer and watch the footy.
Other times I will be clean cut, dress stylishly and go to the ballet.
Funnily enough I feel gay either way. I have one set of people who say I am sooo gay, and another who ask me if I am sure I am gay at all and sometimes have a hard time believing it.
I love men, I just do. I like being with a man emotionally, mentally, physically. What difference does it make what we are doing, watching Football or Funny Girl.
I understand people not wanting to be around negative people, but there are plenty of ultra feminine men who are grounded and have a great heart and are beautiful humans, much as there are many ultra masculine men with the same qualities. You guys who prefer one over the other are missing out on some great people who inhabit this world. Open your mind and heart to see what being gay is really all about.
Dan I have to say the answer to your questions was in your own post
"This is who I am"
They are feminine and flamboyant, and just because the media decided to exploit that and make a joke of those men, doesn't make their lives any less valid. They are equal, as we are equal, because we were born that way, as equals, and we will remain that way, regardless of others beliefs or opinions.