From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Subject: Re: Redefining masculinity
Originator: glp@merlin
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 21:33:56 GMT


In article <1992Aug20.210521.15426@microsoft.com>, bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:
|> 
|> (glp)
|> /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 have heard this same story (or a slightly modified version)
|> from many gay men.  The way they feel, or act, is so radically
|> different from the flamboyant gays they have come in contact with,
|> that they talk themselves into believing they aren't really gay.
|> There aren't enough resemblances.
|> Do you see how the negative images were a handicap, and hindered your
|> own coming out process? 

Yea, they did - but I realized that it was the images
that were a problem and not the people.  If we were
represented as we really were, running the gamut from
wildly nelly to numbingly butch, then I wouldn't have
had a problem.  If I hadn't been brought up to believe
that conforming was good and difference was bad, I wouldn't
have had a problem.  The *least* of my problems was that 
there existed publically nelly men who could be
touted as the example of the "sick queers".  Why is
that so hard to understand?

|> (glp)
|> /I got older, I got smarter,
|> /and I found out there were gay men like me and that was all I
|>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> /needed.  
|> 
|> Remember what I said about a need for positive role models?

Right.  I'm not "nelly" and I'm out.  By your
definition, I'm a role model.  And I'm positive
because I'm proud of who I am - not because I
can make fun of the prissy queens as good as any
straight person.  I'm a positive role model 
not because I disprove nelly = gay, but because
I disprove gay = bad.  It's a distinction that
you don't seem to catch.
 
|> (glp)
|> /What I had done was to accept the view of this homophobic society
|> /we grow up in that gay = nelly = bad.  
|> 
|> Then the task for us to to prove that gay != bad.  As long as 
|> nelly = gay = bad, then why in the world should we want to fulfill
|> a negative stereotype?

The point I was trying to make is that you can't drop
"nelly" from that equation and have everything alright - 
gay still equals bad.  

Non-nelly = not identifyably gay = not identifiably bad

and that's *all* it gains you.  

|> (glp)
|> /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.  

|> But if it comes down to comparison, the non-nelly gay men are a hell of a 
|> lot more likely to be accepted.  Not by everybody, to be sure; you will 
|> never be accepted by everybody, and that would be a ridiculous pursuit.
|> But one hell of a lot more people would look on being gay as less of
|> an adventure in bizarreness if we didn't behave in unusual fashion.

It's important to my mental health that I don't look
to others for my acceptance.  I look to others to keep
my job and I tailor my behavior to fit into the workplace
- but everyone does that for a whole slew of reasons, not
just sexuality.
But outside of work - I don't care.  I *can't* care - I
spent too long getting to where I liked and accepted myself
that taking up the mindset that there is something about
me worth hiding, worth molding into conformity to get
other people to like me is just not doable.  And I 
strongly believe that the road travels from *your*
attitude to mine - because I was where you are and
I'm much happier now, and I'm out and I don't have to
lie and all the good things that go along with that.

There is nothing about my sexuality that needs to
be hidden.  Is there something about yours that
demands it?

|> (glp) 	
|> / You have the nerve to accuse someone else of forcing conformity?
|> 
|> Yes.  The soc.motss forum appears to be less of a forum and more of a
|> sewing circle.  People who already have their minds made up about 
|> the gay movement get together to pat each other on the backs and tell
|> each other how clever and enlightened they are.  If you don't believe
|> me, read some of anderson's crap.

Oh, the cabal.  I not a member (first rule of being a 
member of the cabal: deny being a member) and it doesn't
exist anyway (second rule of being a member of the cabal:
deny its existance).

I think your problem with soc.motss comes from people
identifying your attitude as buying into and blaming
gay people for the prejudices of straight society.
Looks that way to me, too.
 
|> (glp)
|> /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?
|> 
|> I didn't say that.  In fact, I have said no less than seven times now
|> that no one deserves to be discriminated against.  And, no less than
|> seven times, you (and the rest) have ignored what I said, set up a straw
|> man argument, and asked me to defend positions I do not hold.  

You can say that people who act more flamboyant in
public could attract less attention and therefore
less discrimination and you *might* be right.  But
when you go on to blame these people for the discrimination
that other gay people feel (which keeps them in the closet)
then you are saying that some gay people *cause* the 
discrimination against others.  Is that correct?

How I figured it out is pretty simple.  Compare the 
amount of discrimination against gay people that would
exist if all nelly queens disappeared to how much would
exist if all homophobic straight people disappeared.

-- 
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