Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sheeez. And I thought being *gay* was complicated.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » GLBT Donate to DU
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 01:35 AM
Original message
Sheeez. And I thought being *gay* was complicated.
>>>By the constant need to ascribe homosexual leanings to any two men who happen to be in the same room together for more than a few minutes, we are in fact teaching a terrible lesson to society and especially to young men. We are in fact teaching them that any kind of emotional connection between two males is in fact 'gay'. We are teaching that any kind of emotional connection between male fictional characters is to be ridiculed and considered 'queer'. No, there is no such thing as two men or young boys being close friends and even having an emotional connection. Nope, they OBVIOUSLY have to be secretly gay and/or in love with each other. Bring that down to a societal level, especially one such as ours that still often punishes homosexuality, and you have an entire generation of men and boys who are convinced that being friends with another 'dude' on any level other than surface-level will cause them to be called out as 'gay'. And, if it must be said, this kind of automatic presumption of homosexuality is indeed an insult to actual gay men. It is insulting both in its content (it doesn't take real homosexuality seriously) and its reaction (the constant teasing and mockery). Sometimes, two guys hanging out together, be it for solving crime or teaching the alphabet, are really just friends.>>>


Seems it all started with Bert and Ernie:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-mendelson/because-they-are-not-gay-_b_925111.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=081211&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry&utm_term=Daily+Brief


My first reaction is: if we can de-stigmatize homosexuality ( I mean *really* de-stigmatize it) , everyone.... could just friggin' relax.

So.... wtf is the delay here? Seems to me, said de-stigmatization is a win/win. Both from GLBT POV *and* from straight peoples' mental health perspective.



Refresh | +2 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 01:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. I think this will diminish as GLBT*ers are more accepted.
Edited on Sat Aug-13-11 01:44 AM by Hosnon
I, myself, have noticed a change with my straight friends. I didn't come out until late in my 20's, and had a tight group of male friends. The reaction was positive and since coming out, I've detected a greater willingness for them to acknowledge male to male love (in the familial or friendship sense).

As it is, gay men (and women in that context) actually lead that charge. We can show that deep male/male relationships can exist sans sexual attraction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. I kindasorta agree. But.........
I think there is a certain paradox lurking here. Maybe multiple paradoxes.

My guess is that when when H was... let's say.... "invisible" ( back in the day; IF , in fact it ever really WAS invisible) male platonic relationships were much less self-concious. Which is pretty much what the article says, though it does not do so explicitly.

GLBT visibility ( thru political and social change, amplified by media) keeps the topic in everybody's head. Consciously or subconsciously. Whereas there is *technically* more acceptance, your typical straight guy, for instance does NOT want to be mistaken for gay. NOT. N-O-T.

The paradox is that the more technical societal acceptance, the greater the anxiety that one will erroneously be perceived as gay.



I guess one could look at it as a necessary process. "Growing pains", quite literally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
murielm99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 01:57 AM
Response to Original message
2. I always figured that the whole point of their friendship
( Bert and Ernie) was to teach children that people with very different personalities could still be friends.

I hope things are changing. For the sake of the men in my life and for all the other men, gay or straight. Men should be able to hang out, to have friendships, or work relationships. I hope my children's' generation is the one that will make a difference.

Great post, Smarmie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. Thanks. I agree.
Not so much that it's a "great post" ( but, shucks , thanks again.) but with this:

>>>>hope things are changing. For the sake of the men in my life and for all the other men, gay or straight. Men should be able to hang out, to have friendships, or work relationships. I hope my children's' generation is the one that will make a difference.>>>>>>>

Ummm.... how old are you're children? ( Just trying to figure out the expected wait-time. And do NOT tell me that they aren't born yet!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
murielm99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. They are 27, 29, and 31.
My son seems to have great friendships where they don't worry about "that's so gay." I see already that his generation has a less stupid attitude about same sex friendship and more openness about homosexuality.

A lot of the men of my generation are so self-conscious. Not all of them, but far too many.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 02:15 AM
Response to Original message
4. I did not care for that article at all.
Edited on Sat Aug-13-11 02:18 AM by Behind the Aegis
Is it somewhat trivial to be going on about Bert and Ernie tying the knot? Sure. I felt that article is part of the fucking problem. Boo-fucking-hoo straight men can't be "just friends." I call "BULLSHIT!" We see it all the goddamned time, usually followed by some reference to their "doing chicks." Why can't there be gay muppets?! And that shit about "their muppets and don't have a sexual orientation (from another article)," well, then why the hell were Piggy and Kermit married?! What really needs to be learned, and I am not calling for a gay muppet wedding, is that being gay IS NOT always about SEX!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. There are problems w. the article but it brings up stuff that should be looked at.
Edited on Sat Aug-13-11 07:47 AM by Smarmie Doofus
Example:

>>>Bert and Ernie are just friends. I know that because the producers of Sesame Street told me so. Does the Gay Rights Movement really want to be seen as forcing two men to get married irrespective of their actual say in the matter? Just because they are close friends who both happen to be male doesn't meant that they are secretly lovers pining to get married. In a nation where real gay couples are unable to get married in their home state, it is an insult and a cheapening of their real love to demand that two fictional television puppets get married just because they fit into certain gay stereotypes. There is plenty of work left to do in the struggle for equal rights for the LGBT community. Those involved (and those who support their struggles) surely have more important things to do then forcing two unwilling Muppets to tie the knot. And they certainly don't want to send the message to men everywhere that a man can't be kind and friendly to another man without being considered homosexual. Real men, regardless of sexual orientation, can be friends with other men.>>>>


"Just friends"? Well , I wouldn't jump to that conclusion based solely on the producers' say-so. Lots of real-life people think they're not homosexual when all the available evidence begs to differ. ( The GOP Wyoming senator whose-name-I can't-recall, for instance.)

OTOH, I like this:

>>>>In a nation where real gay couples are unable to get married in their home state, it is an insult and a cheapening of their real love to demand that two fictional television puppets get married just because they fit into certain gay stereotypes. >>>>>

And this part is both significant and incontestable:

>>>And they certainly don't want to send the message to men everywhere that a man can't be kind and friendly to another man without being considered homosexual. Real men, regardless of sexual orientation, can be friends with other men.>>>>

Which you, I think, would probably be the first to agree with:

>>>What really needs to be learned, and I am not calling for a gay muppet wedding, is that being gay IS NOT always about SEX!>>>>

We all spend a lot of time NOT having sex. Yet gay men are essentially defined by it... ( the orientation, if not the activity) ......and straight men feel compelled to define themselves in RELATION to gay men.

Pretty convoluted stuff. I think maybe it's time to "take it up with Mr. Whosits on the Goodwill Hour." ( Lifeboat.)



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 02:17 AM
Response to Original message
5. When you look at old group photos of guys from the
Early Twentieth Century, and even before that, young men would have their arms draped around each other's shoulders, very casually, and as a simple expression of being friends.

And we are talking about guys in rather macho professions - miners and railway workers, cowboys, and all that.

It seems like the sick notion of two men touching each other indicating that those two men were being gay didn't come about until we became a nation of office workers. I think office work is so dreary that it caused all sorts of repressive taboos.

Perhaps the taboos stemmed from the overall Puritanical-ness of the office place. You had to wear clothes that don't conform to the body's need to be comfortable, and you can't move around very much, and you are always in hierarchal settings. Plus you are inside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. You still see this cross-culturally.
Another paradox, I'm afeared: males are demonstrably physically affectionate in , for example, at least some Arab/Muslim societies. Paradox: actual homosexuality is dramatically more taboo there than in our nutty post-industrial 'don't touch-me, don't-touch-me ' panic-room society.

Added variable: the ME cultures seem to be relentlessly homoSOCIAL. Males in one room. Females in another. H is reviled if not entirely denied. ( Meaning: they pretend it doesn't exist.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. I'd say the 'taboo' is more dramatized in the ME but the actual
level of gay sex is easily as high as here or anywhere. The excessive focus on the 'taboo' is part of the distraction from the reality, not a reflection of the reality. It is part of the pretense, and it is pretense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
keopeli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 04:12 AM
Response to Original message
7. Must be tought to be a straight (or closeted) white male in america these days
Must seem like everywhere you turn, there's straight people turning gay overnight. Scary!

A man who is comfortable in his own skin, whether gay or straight, is sexy and draws interest.

Two men! Whoo! Call the police!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. Psychologically it IS tough.
The point being: there are no winners here.

Homophobia hurts everyone.

Every. One.

Our task is , it seems to me, to help people to see that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
11. The worst kind of homophobia is the closeted homophobia.
Are Bert & Ernie Gay? Whos cares! The message about Bert & Ernie being Gay or not? Everyone should care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 22nd 2024, 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » GLBT Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC