When I came here it was because people were supposed to be interested in "manly" things and all that, and now all I seem to read is the stereotypical lament of gay men who aren't in relationships desperate to get into relationships.
So, where's all the talk about duck hunting, backpacking, and all this studly stuff we're supposed to be doing?
So, where's all the talk about duck hunting, backpacking, and all this studly stuff we're supposed to be doing?
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Sat, November 10, 2007 - 3:31 PMOh, and speaking of studly manly things, has anybody here volunteered for bird clean-up or other jobs related to the oil spill in SF Bay? I will likely be going out tomorrow to help in that effort myself.
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Sat, November 10, 2007 - 3:34 PMDuck hunting, beer, pretzels, etc. - check out lesbian but not 'lesbian'. This whole gay but not gay thing is so ridiculous - is there a black but not black tribe?
In America, gay men compose, what, 2% of the population? What good does it do to fragment us even more than we already do? With so few of us, there's plenty of room to discuss whatever the hell you want whether it's leather, feathers, relationships, wanting relationships, wanting kids, wanting to live in Iran, hell, talk about whatever you want.
Unfortunately, not many gay men are into the stereotypical 'studly' stuff you mention. I sure wish they were. I've been looking for those gay men for over a decade, and have found them in two places - porno movies, and porno magazines. And again, unfortunately, most of those guys aren't gay at all; rather they are desperately seeking money for child support, or their opiate addiction, or their student loan payments, etc.
Yea, life sucks. -
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Sun, November 11, 2007 - 12:24 PM
You guys with ur slave-ish devotion to labels......... How limiting....
What makes duck hunting, etc so fucking studly, anyway....?? Going up against an animal 400 times smaller, with a god- damn GUN is a REAL show of MANHOOD, oh YEAH.....
What fucking antiquated, out-dated, superficial ideas of what being a MAN/STUD is......
Sorry... not to jump down ur throat, D... But seriously....there is- as Jona so well pointed out- SO much pain, hate, fear, and unfairness passed round because of peoples subconscious disregard for others who are different them them.....
SO sad wh much of peoples discontent is cause by their OWN prejudiced, bullshyt......
Sorry about the rant... u hit a nevre... i HATE narrow limited thinking....
-
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Sun, November 11, 2007 - 1:13 PMI took this to mean out of the gay mainstream. Or perhaps being gay out of the straight mainstream. Nothing to do with being more manly.
In my own life I have gone from accepting myself as a gay man through being somewhat of a gay separatist to reaching out to a wider world.
For me authenticity is important regardless of the many pressures to conform to a particular definition.
-
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 12:51 PM<I took this to mean out of the gay mainstream. Or perhaps being gay out of the straight mainstream. Nothing to do with being more manly.>
The duck hunting comment is obviously a joke, which is lost on all of you. But my point is still well-taken. I'm seeing so much bitching here about people not having relationships, and yet this is THE #1 GAY STEREOTYPE of all. The other night I went into a gay bar and sat at the bar, and not more than 10 minutes went by before some guy came in and sat next to me and soon began to go on about how he was unhappy and needed a relationship! He went on about how hot the bartender was, and that he was so alone, and all that. TYPICAL gay male behavior. And I see the same stuff here on the "gay but not "gay"" tribe.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Sun, November 11, 2007 - 2:09 PMI thought this post was full of self loathing-self-homophobic ideals.
And I find it in general troubling how many gay men cling to the Ideal gay man not being "gay"... it's like you don't want to "gay"...a stereotype you recognize and loathe ... so you pigeon hole others through assumptions and lob on hate towards an annoymous collective you tag as faggy and weak. Because in his statement he painted two pictures... The Gay is weak... and a The Gay but not "gay" is strong and likes to hunt ducks. Tons of Drag queens out there i'm sure can put on stilletos and murder some ducks. WITHOUT a Gun to boot.
Either "straight" acting or "fiercely flaming" or just being who you naturally are..without any polarization... if you suck cock...get your cocked suck...enjoy a good bang here and there...or EVERYWHERE.... we're united through preference of the same sex the companionship of another male.
I took this tribe to be a Tribe that was rather anti-tag for the fluid gay male who lives not in one niche but various ones. If this was the Straight acting self loathing homo tribe... i would have not have joined.
-
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 12:47 PM<I thought this post was full of self loathing-self-homophobic ideals.>
Well, you thought wrong. You have absolutely no idea who I am, what I've done in my life, how many children I have, who I fuck, where I go drinking, what careers I've had, or much of anything else about my life. So, it's rather presumptuous of you to think that I'm self-loathing, isn't it?
It would be the same thing as if I said to you that you weren't "black enough" because you're too literate to be a black person. After all, we all know that black people don't own computers, except long enough to steal them and resell them. So, think a little before you start making sweeping statements about people you don't know.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 3:03 PMDude your post was self explainatory and left nothing to be implied. You labled gays as whiney and weak. .. and asked where the strong "straight" acting duck hunting non gay gays were. That you would leap to attack me on basis of race (your argument has absolutely no correlation... it's just flat out being a bigot for sake or provocation) ..... You're just as "bitchy" as any "queer". -
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 6:18 PM<. .. and asked where the strong "straight" acting duck hunting non gay gays were.>
And that was a joke. You're so damned serious that you can't see even the simplest of humor. This is most unfortunate.
<That you would leap to attack me on basis of race (your argument has absolutely no correlation... it's just flat out being a bigot for sake or provocation) ..... You're just as "bitchy" as any "queer". >
Oh, yeah, you think I "attacked" you, too. Given what you've written so far, you need to chill out, get a life, preferably learn to socialize with people and get out of your self-delusional shell. I didn't attack you for being black; I was simply making a very apt comparison between black folks who don't "act" like black folks and gay folks who don't "act" like gay folks. Unfortunately, I don't see many of the latter here.
A good play you might see is Brian Copeland's "Not A Genuine Black Man". www.briancopeland.com/ I'm proud to say that I had a hand in inspiring him to write the original show. You see, I grew up one city over from the 2nd most racist city in America, which happened to be where Brian grew up. I remember San Leandro being so bad that if I had my boyfriend Jay (who was black) riding in the car with me, the SLPD would follow us from one border of the city to the other along E14th Street. If I was driving alone, the police wouldn't even notice me. But with Jay in the car, they'd tail me.
Anyhow, the impetus for the show was a black caller to Brian's talkshow; who told him he "wasn't black enough" because he was educated, and didn't support the ghetto loser mentality. In fact, the caller said, Brian simply "wasn't a genuine black man."
Your apologies are accepted.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 6:21 PMdude you brought race into the conversation...... i have been holding my tongue on your fat ass.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Thu, March 13, 2008 - 12:13 AMI don't know about the Bay Area thing but out here in the real world there are MANY gay men who are just regular-type guys who do regular-type guy stuff. I am one of those regular-type guys who just changed my oil and filter today and worked on my truck. I go fishing, sometimes Pheasant hunting. I like to go hiking up at Lassen Volcanic Nat'l Park about 30 mins East of here. I wear Levi's 501's, boots, T-shirts or Western-type shirts and I just bought two Dickies work shirts yesterday cuz I like that type of shirt. Being gay doesn't mean anything really, either you're a regular-type of guy or you're not, it's not something that can be faked, no matter how much leather or other "butch" clothing you wear. I think that the biggest problem that the "gay community" has is the idea that we're somehow "special" or "unique" and apart from the "regular guy" crowd. Being gay has nothing to do with my masculinity other than enhancing that masculinity in a way. I do not judge other gay men for dressing in drag or acting bitchy and "gay", you know what I mean, it's their thing, but it sure ain't for me. I like to play pool, cards, have a few beers with a pepperoni and olive pizza or a couple of Jack Daniel's and Cokes with my friends, most of whom are straight. I live in a conservative and religious area with lots of cowboys and ranchers. The only people who know I'm gay are those that I confide in, the rest are just acqaintances of mine who have no business knowing I'm gay, it's just not part of everyday communication and I'm fine with that. I find that people who insist on making everyone around them know that they're "gay" are really tactless and confrontational, it really isn't anyone else's business other than close friends and family. How many guys walk up to you and say "Hey, my name is ********** and I'm gay?" It's more information than most people want to hear. Nobody really wants to hear about your sexuality, they only care if you're a nice guy or whatever. If that makes me some kind of "closeted" gay man then I guess I can't say anything more about it. To me, "being in the closet" pertains to a PERSONAL acceptance, or non-acceptance of one's sexuality. Many of the "in your face" gay crowd do more damage to the acceptance of gays than anything. It is a personal matter and should stay that way, even if you feel better by lecturing people on your sexual preferences and practices. If you're a guy you should behave like a guy, at least that's the way I feel about it. But I have always had a masculine self-image and find that being gay means that I appreciate masculinity in myself and others, no matter what their 'preferences" are. I'm sure that I'll be raked over the coals by the P.C. crowd, but that's just how I feel personally. I can never really understand why a man who likes other men would want to act, dress or behave in a feminine manner, unless it is the only way that they can accept themselves and their sexuality, I don't know. I enjoy being a man, I'm glad as hell that I have a penis and balls and really enjoy getting together with another "regular-type" guy for some behind-closed-doors man to man action. Or taking off into the woods and stripping down with a buddy and getting it on in the great outdoors. I'm not saying that everyone should be like me, I'm just saying that, for me, being a "regular-type" guy is who I am inside and outside. I think being in an environment like San Francisco for instance, can influence how guys relate to each other and what is "acceptable" and what isn't, compared to those of us out in the boonies. Just a few thoughts of mine on the topic. Thanks for letting me tell my story. It isn't "stereotypical 'studly' stuff", it's just being who you are. I know so many gay people who say that they don't have any "straight" friends or refer to them as "breeders". What nonsense! And people wonder why many gays aren't accepted in society as a whole. If you want to live in an exclusively gay "ghetto" that's your right, but don't assume that any guy who doesn't feel the same way is "playing" at being butch, etc. Most people are very open to being friendly if you give them the same consideration that you expect from them. Being "gay but not gay" is an everyday thing for me, I'm sure it is for millions of other men in my position as well. Trying to pull them down for being "stereotypical studly" types does nothing but betray a certain mindset that doesn't feel that it is possible to be "gay and not gay". I'm a regular guy with morals and self-respect, I don't feel the need to tell everyone I meet that I'm "gay". It's too much information, nobody wants to hear that shit! Be a man of your word and treat others as you would like to be treated and everything will be fine. Just my own personal opinions, everyone has their own but mine work for me, if you find it "un-gay friendly" then there's nothing more I can say. I enjoy being a just a regular-type guy, just like millions of other "gay" men.
-
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Sun, November 11, 2007 - 3:19 PMTo me it means, having one's own brain, and not being absorbed by the commercial
subculture, the gay ghetto...
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 7:28 AMI didn't know there were things that we were "supposed" to do.... -
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 9:38 AMYou're supposed to like disco, not rock
You're supposed to spend $50 or more each on skin care products, and in general be a shopaholic
etc. etc..
You're supposed to be clean shaven, groomed, and cologned.
-
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 11:45 AMyou're supposed to be able to sing show tunes at the drop of a hat
you're supposed to only patronize gay-owned businesses
you're supposed to walk little yappy dogs
blah, blah, blah -
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 4:25 PMA few years ago Daniel Harris wrote a book called The Rise And Fall Of Gay Culture. According to him there are two kinds of gay men: those into drag and those into leather. That was news to me! -
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 4:46 PMthose are 2 types of gay men, but i have a hunch there are probably other types too.
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 7:41 PMWhich is really only one type. since leather is a form of drag. Of course, for us
more spiritually
evolved types, having a body at all is a form of drag. ;-) -
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 9:31 PMand that there's wisdom to be gathered in any form/body/drag... -
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Mon, November 12, 2007 - 11:04 PMi've met my share of drag queens who i could consider gay but not 'gay.'
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Tue, November 13, 2007 - 3:19 PM<and that there's wisdom to be gathered in any form/body/drag...>
My drag usually consists of what is considered inappropriate for the given situation. I once showed up at an upscale film festival wearing overalls -- neat and snazzy looking, but overalls all the same. The other night I was at a show where I was the only one wearing a cowboy hat and a vest. Everybody else was in leather or bluejeans. I never wear bluejeans, by the way; not because I dislike them but because they're worn too much by others.
I haven't done drag or genderfuck in many years, but I've been thinking about it, especially in one of my social circles where that's the very last thing anyone would expect me to wear.
Usually, though, I wear very utilitarian clothes, owing to the fact that I go out and listen to a *lot* of live music, which means that I'm a target for having drinks spilled on me all the time.
-
-
Appropriate attire
Mon, March 10, 2008 - 11:05 AMI wnet to a midnight concert of electronic music at Stanford in the 80's at the DC Power Lab
(which was actually named after a guy named D.C. Power)
and it was outdoors and bloody cold,
so the only covering I had was my dad's WW II Army blanket that smelled of being in the trunk.
I wore it in to the wine-and-cheese reception and watched an empty zone of 10' diameter form around me...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: I thought this was about being gay but not "gay"
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 9:35 AMHow very interesting. I guess I'll comment now since I recently decided to be more active in this group. Sorry guys I'm not a scholar so go easy on me if you decide to bump heads. It's called "gay but not, gay" and some take this literally where as It probably wasn't intended to be presented literally. There does seem to be an obvious split between Gay men whose personality appears to have a Royal Air like a Queen but not always so ridiculous a queen. And then the other is still gay and usually can still be pin-pointed as someone who is gay but not always. For the sake of this post I'll categorize these two as Queens and Gays. Sometimes the Gays LOVE the Queens and at other times it is not so. I believe this forum was intended to for those GAYS who seem not able to fundamentally connect with Queens. This is where I stand anyway. I've clubbed a lot in my younger times and dated my fair share and I've continuously been labeled as 'not so gay' or as "being with a gay license". This has always been consistent. None of this bothers me. Queens and I have never been able to understand each another on any level. Casual conversation is even very limited. So here I am, a member of this tribe simply to understand more of this difference. I've seen many comments in this group about shaving pubes...... Let me say that I work at a gym and everyone of all walks of life shave their pubes. -
-
Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 9:41 AMplease read this post instead of the one above:
How very interesting. I guess I'll comment now since I recently decided to be more active in this group. Sorry guys I'm not a scholar so go easy on me if you decide to bump heads. It's called "gay but not, gay" and some take this literally where as It probably wasn't intended to be. There does seem to be an obvious split between Gay men whose personality appears to have a 'Royal' vibe to them like a Queen or King would but not always so ridiculous as say a drag queen. And then the other is still gay and usually can still be pin-pointed as someone who is gay but not always only because they don't act like a queen. For the sake of this post I'll categorize these two as Queens and Gays. Sometimes the Gays LOVE the Queens and at other times it is not so. I believe this forum was intended to for those GAYS who seem not able to fundamentally connect with Queens. This is where I stand anyway. I've clubbed a lot in my younger times and dated my fair share and I've continuously been labeled as 'not so gay' or as "being without a gay license". This has always been consistent. None of this bothers me. Queens and I have never been able to understand each another on any level. Casual conversation is even very limited. So here I am, a member of this tribe simply to understand more of this difference.
on a different note, I've seen many comments in this group about shaving pubes...... Let me say that I work at a gym and everyone of all walks of life shave their pubes. -
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 10:45 AMi'm not sure what you consider to be a queen. but from my point of view, the "gay but not gay" model doesn't specify whether or not one is from the butch or feminine side of the spectrum but whether or not they fall outside the mainstream perception of what a gay person is supposed to be-of course that whole paradigm has been debated on over & over again because everyone's perception is so different.
bottom line for me-we have exactly one aspect that holds us in common-the fact that we're sexually attracted to other individuals of the same gender. other than that, all bets are off.
-
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 3:34 PM<bottom line for me-we have exactly one aspect that holds us in common-the fact that we're sexually attracted to other individuals of the same gender. other than that, all bets are off.>
Given that sucking dick appears to be the only thing gay men have in common, having a "gay identity" seems as superfluous as having a "blue-eyed identity".
For me, the reason I've chosen to hang here is because so many gay men have adopted personality traits that drive me up a wall, and I was hoping to correspond with and maybe meet gay men who don't fall into these traits. The traits that annoy me are bitchiness, gossip, discussing intimate details about one's sex life upon first meeting someone, going on about how one doesn't have a lover, that awful unfriendly cruise stare-down gaze, and empty-headed talk.
-
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 4:33 PMfunny, i haven't really found most people, gay men included, to be like that.
-
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 3:35 PM
Amen.
And for me, often it extends into what things are 'considered' to be unquestionably 'masculine', as well.....
I have mannish mannerisms, and many interests that are usually widely thought of as 'masculine'....
I abhor victimizing violence, ignorant, desperate, unfettered machismo, psychotic need for control and dominance, and small minded, narrow interpretations of what it is to BE a 'man'.....
In life i've realized that ALOT of guys who bemoan 'REAL mean', or 'manliness' have SEEEEEEREEEIIIISS issssssssues.......
-
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 3:39 PM
I was 'Amen-ing' what Henry was saying, tho......
-
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 5:45 PM"bottom line for me-we have exactly one aspect that holds us in common-the fact that we're sexually attracted to other individuals of the same gender. other than that, all bets are off. "
Yes. Exactly. I second ST.'s Amen.
The vexing thing for me, and why I was drawn to the "gay but not gay" thing is that there *is* a gay culture out there that I just don't groove with. It has nothing to do with the personality traits David listed, i.e., gossipy, empty-headed talk, etc., which I have found in some straight people also. Lots of straight people, in fact. And it doesn't have to do with "queeny" vs "masculine" or any of that kind of thing. First, by "gay culture" I think most of us, myself included, are talking about gay male culture, and that in itself says a lot.
I think what gets me most about 'mainstream' gay culture is that everything is sexualized, which makes sense, given that it's a community defined by sexual preferences. But the flipside of that is I find it ultimately devaluing when the first filter a person is viewed through is how fuckable they are and not what they know, what their interests are, how accomplished they are in their profession, hobbies, are they kind and generous, etc.
I'm also over the whole body fascism thing...do we really all need to look like underwear models? And there's the race thing. I fully realize that not everybody thinks this way, but 'gay culture', taken as a whole, tends to treat ethnic men in one of two ways: they're either fetishized or they're invisible. This tendency, combined with the sexual filter being the first one through which a person is viewed, leads to a subtle and sometimes not so subtle racism that I find disturbing.
Real life personal experience of this? I was hanging out at the Eagle in San Francisco one time and was supposed to meet a friend there, but I didn't know if I was early or late and had no idea what time it was as I don't wear a watch and forgot my cell phone. So I asked this guy who was wearing a watch for the time. His response? "I'm sorry but I don't like rice." And then he turned his back on me! I encountered somebody who literally would not give me the time of day because he wasn't sexually attracted to me because of my race. I can't imagine for a second that that exchange would've taken place in a straight bar, and if the person I approached for the time was a straight man or woman of any orientation. Granted most guys would not be as extreme as that, but I think a similar dynamic takes place on a more subtle level more often than we like to think.
My partner often ribs me about how most of my friends, particularly my close friends, are straight. And I haven't deliberately made that happen, it's just that when I pursue friendships, there are other qualities more important to me than if we have the same sexual orientation. For whatever reason, most of the people that have come into my life and stuck as friends have not been the gay ones.
All this was a long-winded way of saying that I was drawn to this tribe hoping to find other gay men who also don't groove on the mainstream gay culture. But for me, it doesn't come down to hyper-masculinity vs queeniness or whatever and despite sexual orientation not being high on my list of important friend qualities, I do wish I had more gay male friends. -
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 6:12 PM
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm also over the whole body fascism thing......
And there's the race thing. I fully realize that not everybody thinks this way, but 'gay culture', taken as a whole, tends to treat ethnic men in one of two ways: they're either fetishized or they're invisible. !!!!!!!!!!!
FUCKING AAAAA, Khan ....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And SO many 'mainstream' or... melanin challenged bros cry "Blind" if u should point this out to them, or have NO real idea how pervasive it is..........
Theres also SUCH iron clad class / social standing status hierocracy ...... which i've always thought has gotten traced over from het society.... -
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Fri, November 16, 2007 - 10:45 PMI agree with a lot that's been said.
Perhaps an alternative title for this group might be gay and beyond.
Nikos.
www.nikosdiaman.com -
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Sat, November 17, 2007 - 2:46 AM<Perhaps an alternative title for this group might be gay and beyond. >
Gay, The Next Dimension
I picture the title coming up on a massive widescreen with Dolby surroundsound.
-
-
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Sat, November 17, 2007 - 2:44 AM<So I asked this guy who was wearing a watch for the time. His response? "I'm sorry but I don't like rice." And then he turned his back on me! >
Yes. This was one of several annoying traits I failed to mention when I listed the things that annoy me off the top of my head. The whole "I don't acknowledge you unless I'm attracted to you" thing. The flip side of that is the "If I''m attracted to you I'm going to treat you like a piece of meat" situation.
I dislike nearly all the gay bar scene, but I definitely will say that the bartenders who work at the Eagle to a person are the friendliest folks I've ever encountered at gay bars. Thus I go only when they're empty so I can chat with the various bartenders. Doug, Matt, Vern, Larry, and gosh I forget the rest of their names -- all have been very nice to me. I also go the Powerhouse when it's empty (Mondays and Tuesdays) and talk to Ray abou scuba diving and preserving the oceans, and to Jose about politics or various social activism stuff or whatever comes up. Very nice guys.
But the crowd at either of these bars? Forget it. While the crowd at the Powerhouse can be downright obnoxious, the crowd at the Eagle is just basically lame. I happen to be a "type" (bear), but I have no desire to be the object of someone's fetishism. Thus, I'll turn and walk away if someone stares me down or conversely walks up to me uninvited and rubs my tummy. Fuck that. Treat me with respect. Unfortunately, many gay men I've met just don't know what respect is.
-
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Sat, November 17, 2007 - 4:39 PMWhen I was visiting Montreal in the Seventies I arranged to meet a friend at a gay dance at McGill. I arrived there before he did and wanted to dance. I asked several men but they all said no. The message seemed obvious. They were not interested in having sex or a relationship.
It reminded me of an earlier exprience I had my first time in Italy ten years earlier. I went into a place along the Tiber that was playing dance music and asked a couple of women to dance. Too forward! Llittle did they know I was a gay man.
In public places people are concerned about guilt by association. In private, in the dark, away from others surprising things occur.
www.nikosdiaman.com
-
-
a different way
Tue, November 27, 2007 - 1:20 PMOne can be gay without falling into all the stereotypes, shallowness and limitations of that label. None of those negative traits are exclusively gay to begin with. The focus on sex is very male. Shallowness is rampant in mainstream American society with its emphasis on consumerism and celebrity worship.
Homosexuality was primarily underground before Stonewall. Gay Liberation Front, the first gay militant group that emerged in New York insisted on a broad agenda including peace, gender and racial equality, economic justice as well as sexual liberation. Most organizations now deal with single issues.
I am openly gay and attend many gay events but am not limited to a narrow perspective. I enjoy socializing with straights as well as gays, women as well as men, individuals of all ages and races. I prefer building bridges rather than walls between people.
For me the mainstream is boring. There is a different way.
www.nikosdiaman.com
-
-
Re: Proof reading is everything
Sat, November 17, 2007 - 11:07 PMI appreciate your point of view as well but as far as a reply goes you obviously completly missed it. my post wasn't about what i Consider to be a queen and i wasn't making butch or feminine specifications or comparisons to the mainstream perception. What i was trying to explain was why people join under this kind of banner (gay but not gay)/
-
-
-
