From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Subject: Re: Redefining masculinity
Originator: glp@merlin
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:36:48 GMT


In article <1992Aug17.181137.2755@microsoft.com>, bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:

|> /they are only concerned that
|> /we aren't what THEY want us to be - it doesn't matter if we're nellie,
|> /butch, masculine, feminine, feminine-acting-masculine, masculine-acting-
|> /feminine, alternating-between-the-two-every-other-day, etc, etc, etc, etc.
|> 
|> Actually, it matters quite a lot.  The dozen or so straight people who
|> know I'm gay were surprised and quite hard to convince.  The uniform
|> remarks I heard were:
|> 
|> 1.  "But you don't ACT gay."
|> 2.  "Are you sure?"
|> 3.  "If more gays acted like normal people, I don't think that society
|>      would have such a problem with it".
|> 4.  "How come [feminine gay name] has to act like that?"
|> 
|> Being gay should be no more of an issue than being left-handed; something
|> that is definitely not average, but not a glaring difference, either.
|> And a difference which should carry no weight in employment, housing, etc.
|> However, if people rivet in on any one facet of their personality and
|> become polarized by it, the resulting imbalance can be pretty bizarre.

You're missing the very important point of *who* is making it
an issue, *who* is causing it to carry weight, *who* is riveting
on one part of a person's personality.

Before I came out, I was very confused.  I wasn't particularly
nelly and I knew I was attracted to boys.  The only information
I had from the media was that men who were attracted to men 
were both nelly and vile.  So at first I thought I was some
other thing, not gay but still attracted to men, and this kept
me from coming out for a long time.  I got older, I got smarter,
and I found out there were gay men like me and that was all I
needed.  What I also figured out was that my fear of being nelly
was a fear of being mocked, of being pointed out for derision.
I was afraid that if I let myself go I would "flame out" and
that no one would like me - the evidence was all around me.

What I had done was to accept the view of this homophobic society
we grow up in that gay = nelly = bad.  Nelly isn't bad just because
it is; it's bad because it means gay.  Your reasoning that
gay people who act butch are automatically accepted is just plain
wrong.  The people who are getting booted out of the armed forces
for being gay are pretty butch, so much so that no one was able
to "spot" them for all the years they were there.  I know other
people who wear suits and ties and look and act like everyone
else they work with and they still lose their jobs if they 
don't lie about who they fall in love with.

I was worried that no one would like me for what I was.
I have been much happier and more accepted since I learned
to like who I was and to provide an example of a happy, proud
gay man to both straight and gay people alike.  Not someone 
slavering for acceptance, or someone who says "I'm not like
those nasty nelly queens" - I say "You know me and like me
and I'm gay just like those nelly queens".  I think it has to
be better for gay people to be thought better by my actions 
than for me to gain acceptance by pointing out how much more
"normal" I am than those vile queers.
 	

|> People like you want to use "unification" as a sledgehammer to force
|> conformity.  That is also wrong.  This isn't a political convention
|> where we all back a candidate, in spite of his/her flaws.  Smells too 
|> much like groupthink to me.

You have the nerve to accuse someone else of forcing conformity?

|> No.  And, as I have already said, I do not advocate denying anyone rights
|> because of how they act / dress / whatever. 

But you imply it's the fault of the person dressing "wrong"
if they are discriminated against, because you say that
if they dressed "right" they would be accepted.  This is
akin to saying that women who dress "like sluts" deserve
to be raped - what did she expect, after all?
 
|> This discussion is not about denying rights.  It is about the most effective 
|> way to advance gay acceptance in general society.  I maintain that the 
|> bizarreness that is so prevalent among many extreme gay functions works 
|> AGAINST that acceptance.  

Have you never met any wacko bizzare straight people?

|> And, as I suspected, people like
|> you insist that if anyone doesn't like the way you act / dress, then
|> obviously the problem *must* be with the other person.  After all,
|> you are *clearly* in the right, and it's simply a well-known fact that
|> it's not possible for you to be contradicted, isn't it?

Serious pot to kettle action here, hon.  Are you talking to
yourself?  No one is tell *you* how to dress or act.

|> Got news for you bud:  if we don't get at least some respect, the 
|> rights will never come.  That's why it all boils down to what you
|> want:  what is the most effective way to get from Point A to Point B?

And I insist that strength and pride will take us much farther
than attempting to conform to some straight ideal of "masculine"
and "feminine".


-- 
Greg Parkinson                  Phone: 212-657-7814  Fax: 212-825-8607
Citibank,111 Wall Street        E-Mail: glp@fig.citib.com
New York, New York  10043
The opinions expressed are my own and not those of the big 'ol bank.
Newsgroups: soc.motss