Men all over the world sooner or later confront notions of what it means to be a ”real man” and inevitably compare themselves to some ideal(s) constructed by the societies in which they live. Although different societies sometimes hold up seemingly contradictory ideals of manhood, Mahatma Gandhi in India versus Rambo in the United States, to cite extreme examples, we tend to accept our own society's ideal as normal unless our understanding gets broadened by exposure to other ideals that seem to resonate better with our inner experience.
Gay men everywhere tend to find ourselves excluded to one degree or another from inclusion in the category of “real men” because of our same-sex attraction and because many societies view gay men as effeminate (like a woman). For a man to be like a woman means he is not, in some sense, fully a real man.
The late Harry Hay, arguably the father of gay liberation, inspired by examples of “third-gender” or “two-spirit” concepts he encountered in some Native American cultures, developed a theory of gay identity apart from the prevailing notions of male versus female prevalent in non-gay society. Hay believed that most gay men learn to imitate gender-polarized, heterosexual norms of male/female as a way to survive in homophobic societies and that this imitation distorts their authentic gay identities. He theorized that if gay men could get away from heterosexuals completely, preferably in natural settings, their authentic gay natures would manifest with a little encouragement. The Radical Faerie movement came into being to test and develop Hay's theories.
Hay broke down the different ways of being as “subject-object consciousness” (heterosexual) vs. “subject-subject consciousness,” (homosexual).
Non-gay people tend to view others as different from themselves, as objects to be overcome or used in competition, while people with well-integrated, non hetero-imitative gay identities tend to view others as being like themselves and therefore tend to be more empathetic and cooperative. Although this is obviously a gross generalization, it reflects Hay's innovative theoretical stance that invites the gay reader to contemplate what may be considered essential to gay identity, apart from sexual-affectional attraction, that makes the gay psyche distinct from the non-gay psyche.
For a simple example, as a gay man I can relate to other men by virtue of my experience inhabiting a male body, but I can also relate to women by virtue of my attraction to and love for men. Motivated by Harry Hay's theories Mitch Walker, author of Visionary Love, with Don Kilhefner, founder of the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center, called the first gathering of “Radical Faeries” in 1978.
I attended my first faerie gathering in 1987 in a secluded campground near Los Angeles, California, invited by a friend of Mitch Walker's. The central feature of faerie gatherings is a daily “heart circle,” in which participants are invited to speak their inner truth to a sympathetic audience and receive validation. Clothing is always optional, and various kinds of drag or other colorful and creative costumes your gay spirit moves you to put on are applauded. No one is in charge, meaning anyone can organize a special-interest circle, a ritual, a performance, or plan and prepare meals. Decisions that affect the whole group are made by at-times painstaking consensus rather than by more-convenient, patriarchal majority rule, reinforcing the principle of anti-hierarchical, horizontal power sharing, considered more in tune with subject-subject gay consciousness.
Many gay men find faerie gatherings exceptionally liberating and nurturing, learning to embrace their gay selves fully without having to pretend to be more or less masculine, feminine, or otherwise than one authentically feels at the moment. In contrast to gay bars or other sex-oriented places where gay men meet, faerie gatherings tend to promote a gentle acceptance of everyone present regardless of age or appearance, and that manifests as many shared hugs and kisses and heartfelt conversations in groups or in private. Sex may also be shared privately or in groups but only according to your own desires, if at all.
For me the ultimate benefit of the faerie experience was realizing that no one has the right to dictate to me what it means to be a real man. What I am as a man or as anything else comes from my authentic self, and anyone or any experience that helps me discover and manifest that authentic self is beneficial while others are irrelevant.
I invite readers to share your own views and experiences in the process of discovering and becoming the real men that you are.
I really appreciated your
I really appreciated your acticle and though, I didn't get a chance to meet Harry Hay, I feel, as though, I have, as, what I've read, has not only been a discovery of self, but, of him, as well.
Upon finding out that he was once partnered with Will Geer, who later played, "Grandpa Walton" on "The Waltons" and that he worked his entire life for the betterment of myself and my brothers, at large..., opened my eyes, on how far, we've, truly come. But who are WE?
I live in Oregon, USA and suggest that there's a faerie sanctuary here, as well as, in New Mexico and in Tennesee. (There are others, affiliated with, as well.) Though, I have not been to any other, I have had much involvement with this one. My experience has not always been good.
There's so much "in fighting", that consensus is almost next to impossible, to achieve and the suggested camaraderie, really isn't.
Considering a professed "spirit", I have seen more politics than there was in the presidential election and if you think there was some "below the belt" activity between McCain and O'bama, you've not seen these "girls", in action. Blessed Be ~
Please, I am not suggestive of all, but, the actions of a few, outweigh the many and this behavior has gone on, for, far too long. I believe that Harry Hay, himself, would cry. He did visit, once.
At any rate, I believe that his theory, on gay men getting away from heterosexuals completely, could manifest their authentic gay natures, but, is very difficult to achieve in this unorganized organization. NOMENUS is, but one, of a few, radical faerie groups here and they're based out of California. Communication can be achevied on Tribe.net
My first visit was Y2K and I, like, most other 1st time visitors, was in awe. I was facinated by the thought that this environment existed and chose to pursue, staying there, for a period of time in later years. I've seen so many wonderful people come and go..., for various reasons.
In my opinion, decisions that affect the whole group, by at-times, painstaking consensus rather than by more-convenient, patriarchal majority rule, doesn't work. Maybe in 1978 ~
Anyone familiar with this organization knows that there's more time spent talking about doing, than actually doing. Don't let my words make your decision, see for yourself.
Unfortunately, those that are doers, are made to feel that they have an agenda or ulterior motive and ultimately burn out, for lack of enthusiasim from the general population and the peace felt is broken, usually by those, that have, no real involvement.
"The Land" that the sanctuary encompasses, is so beautiful, but, the place is filthy. If a health inspector made a visit, I am sure that it would be closed for violation of code, knowing that, that code was written for the health and safety of the people using the facility. Who cares?
I know, for fact, that many of you, familiar... agree. So, what's to be done? Is there a concenus?
Being a gay man, I feel whole
Being a gay man, I feel whole because I can pull together my female side and my male side, to make a super gay man.
I like that I have feelings of love, foreplay, and can make a hell of a lasagna. I also am happy with carpentry, getting my hands dirty and doing home repairs.
I really like being this mega homo-man . It is a great feeling, that I would not trade for anything.
When you have the best, why screw around with it?
Mega hairy muscle hugs of buddy daddy bonding.
For a simple example, as a
For a simple example, as a gay man I can relate to other men by virtue of my experience inhabiting a male body, but I can also relate to women by virtue of my attraction to and love for men.
I might add that we (Gay men and women) can relate to non-Gays (heterosexuals, bisexuals, transgenders, etc.) simply by virtue of being human and inhabiting the same planet. We can further relate to bisexuals, transgenders and other socially disenfranchised groups simply by virtue of knowing first-hand the human pain of social ostracism. Now this last part should be patently clear but it is hardly ever true. Historically, socially marginalized groups have tended to wage the social wars of the of the larger society against each other. And it is more complex than simply divide and conquer tactics. It has much more to do with the ingrained social norms that Hays saw operating in relation to gender roles. Those norms also operate across social boundaries.
The Subject of Harry Hay
The Subject of Harry Hay
Harry Hay in fact didn't want Bisexuals as part of his group and felt they should have a separate movement, even though many helped in the gay movement.
The other issue you bring up is that, in theory, we should be able to relate and bond over our similarities, but that doesn't mean it happens. It seems a false assumption that two gay men will have, by nature, a subject-subject relationship. Some could argue that objectification happens as much or more in the gay community as it does in the straight community. Anyone can objectify another and see them as simply an object rather than a person with agency and equal worth. How similar their bodies are doesn't matter.
Particularly in anonymous sex, gay men might even be thought of having object-object relationships. But in this way, they are equal because they both see the other as an object of their desire, and dont' care to know the person as an individual.
Subject-subject relationships, on the other hand, seem to only happen between two or more people of any sex or gender who willingly work to understand and accept the other(s) in that relationship and see them as whole people (subjects).
But, to complicate it a little further, even healthy relationships between two accepting people who see each other as equals, still has objectification. We have a partner of some kind (long or short term) and we can respect them while also simply desiring a part of their body--"Your legs are really sexy" "I love the curve of your mouth." It seems there's nothing wrong with that, as long as we come back to remembering, again and again, that those legs and that mouth is attached to a unified person. That is, we can't just do what we want to with it(without consent), just because we objectify it.
So, perhaps what gay men--and everyone--might be after in the long run, is a suject/object--subjec/object relationship, in which all people involved acknowledge the other as both individual equals and objects of desire.
Jan
Well, the above posting
Well, the above posting was...interesting. I've had numerous experiences with the radical fairies both in private spaces and at public events. I believe that Harry Hay was certainly on to something big around gay identity-but I stop short of truly believing that totally removing oneself from hetero-normative society is the only way to fully realize our gay identity. There will always be people who better function taken out of society-and that's not limited to gay and bi-sexual men. Some people are just more authentic when it comes down to it-despite what the world throws at them, gay, straight...everybody.
One point I would make about the fairies is that when they work they really CAN transform. However, as the poster above me already stated, they are not immune to the normal pitfalls of any organization or group of people. In some cases their MO actually causes LESS comraderie and MORE friction. Cultured anarchy is a nice idea but somebody has to clean up after dinner and pay to keep the roads maintained. You can't spend your life roaming the woods high on methamphetamine. Real life requires a fuller participation.
Every one of us is looking for some form of bliss. If you can find that with the fairies that is awesome. If running around naked with other men, singing and dancing and you yearn to breath free, unencumbered by hetero society then the fairies may be just what you are looking for. Keep in mind that seeking out an authentically gay experience is part of the quest we are all on as gay men-you find it where you find it. In between the fairies and.....at the other end of the spectrum.....the log cabin folks...there is a world of wonderful experience to be had in any number of flavors. Keep trying new ones until you find the one that's right for you.
The Faeries have had their
The Faeries have had their share of infighting, no doubt. In Northern California some rural faeries started an offshoot group called the Billy Club. (That's billy as in billy goat not a policeman's weapon.) The Billies retained the basic functions of the Faeries in their gatherings, such as heart circles and creative dress codes, but unlike the Faeries, the Billies have designated leaders who organize gatherings and enforce a level of organization and civility that could be easily disrupted in Faerie gatherings by individuals or groups that take advantage of the horizontal power structure to stall or disrupt the consensus process.
Although I personally disassociated myself from the Faeries when infighting in Southern California became so destructive that it became nearly impossible to call another gathering, I am thankful to my Faerie brothers who helped me understand how subtle and insidious internalized homophobia can be when it remains unconscious and unquestioned. I have seen the transformative and healing power of Faerie gatherings in close friends, and I remain convinced that gay men can benefit by spending time in an all-gay environment with complete permission to be one's authentic self, receiving nurturing and validation from their peers.
William, Hey buddy, really
William,
Hey buddy, really enjoyed your article. My friend here in Asheville, Mountaine, is very involved in the faerie community, so I've gotten to understand a lot from him, and short mt., Tenn, isn't far at all. you're as intelligent as you are handsome!
hugz,
Spike (spikenc)
The Faeries have changed a
The Faeries have changed a bit since the first gathering was called in 1979. These days there's more than just gay men on the land -- it's men from various identities, and women, and transpeople, and genderqueer, and and and and....
It's wonderful to see the ideas of subject-subject conciousness continue to expand beyond MSM. You don't have to be homosexual to be compassionate.
The Faeries were a big part of my becoming a man, if I've done that yet. The diversity present at gatherings challenges you to question your own identity, to solidify it or break it down as needed. It also challenges you to question the presentation of your identity: do others see me the way I feel that I am? To fully participate, you need integrity. You have to be honest not only with yourself, but with others as well.
I was interested to read
I was interested to read about the Billies above. Not many people know that at one point in the 90's there was a branch of the Billies in Dublin, Ireland. Unfortunately (and isn't it interesting in terms of ideology/lifestyle how political groupings seem, invariably, to follow ecclesiological patterns of orthodoxy/heterodoxy and mutual excommunication? The Irish Billies split simply because somebody slept with somebody else's boyfriend you know the story. Then there was the original Billies, the Mickies and the Mickies (reformed). Then they all moved to the Netherlands. So it goes.
Wow this is nostalgia city. I
Wow this is nostalgia city. I was with the original Billies, the Willies (an offshoot) and the Mickies (reformed). Indeed I am the boyfriend of somebody whom somebody slept with, causing the original split. The sex, by the way, was lousy but I enjoyed the arguments.
You know I can really relate
You know I can really relate to this because well I've evoved sufficiently as to be able to say this publicly I was that drippy and somewhat demented looking person with perhaps the beginnings of a beard but nothing definite who did very experimental food and broke wind in public a lot. I'm now in real estate. At least I was once.
Though I recognize Hay's
Though I recognize Hay's courage in founding Mattachine, there is little else in his opus that holds much appeal for me. Socialism, feminist androgyny, romanticizing tribal people, and the notion that homosexual orientation holds some kind of special "consciousness" versus "subject-object" heteros...not my values. I don't think gays discover their real selves by utopian separation from straights any more than separatist "womyn" discovered theirs. I don't discover my individual real self in solitude; I just discover who I am when I'm being solitary. My real self gets enacted in all sorts of places and relationships, especially with people who are unlike me. Unlike Hay, I have little problem with assimilation.
Although manhood takes many forms, if it truly is as elastic as you seem to suggest...whatever matches your authentic self (not particularly easy to identify, in my experience).. then it really doesn't mean very much. At the very least, power, courage and skill are called for. I know of no culture which considers a weak, cowardly or inept male a real man, no matter what he may say about himself. The hard truth, I believe, is that manhood is by nature a standard, an ideal achieved by work, not a generous gift offered inclusively and sensitively to anyone who wants it. Women can't be men, and boys have to work to become men.
Most men who grow up homosexual find a precocious connection to the feminine in themselves and most of us know the wound to our sense of masculinity that comes from the judgement against that. To my mind, androgyny doesn't resolve that problem but often delays or thwarts its resolution. Manhood is our inheritance, in common with the classical heterosexual cohort, and I think that honoring and working toward much of the traditional treasure of masculine values serves us well. As a wise young man of my acquaintance has said, Internalized homophobia is accepting that because we are gay, we are not really men, and rejecting our native and common masculinity. Manhood, he says, is not the problem; it's the solution. Sounds good to me.
Modern brain imaging shows
Modern brain imaging shows gay men do not have the same brain structure as heterosexual men , and the same emotional structures as str8 women.I think aping heterosexual men is the true manifestation of internalized homophobia.Women too show noble traits of bravery and sacrifice.As a bi men i find gay mens thinking more feminized than mine and have now intention of becoming an assimilated pretend str8 man who is really a man but just incidentally sucks cock.
The bi guy is right. Gay men
The bi guy is right.
Gay men aren't really men at all, except on the outside. We should stop pretending.
We are really women in a male body, just oddtransgenders who happen to like the sausage casing. So let's stop aping heterosexual men and start aping heterosexual women, our true sisters. And teenage women, to be exact. Or divas. I mean, just hang out in the Castro any afternoon and listen and look. Girls with muscles, as far as the eye can see, cackling and bitching and rubbing their cocks. The classic gay really should be the drag queen, who gives up the pretense of masculinity and takes on the pretense of femininity. That's our contribution to human evolution. That's real progress, real liberation. Ru Paul rules.
(Although I am confused about the gay tops, who like fucking a man's ass...are we mannish women or women who have a natural strap-on? Hmmm. Gotta think about that. Or the bears or the leather guys....wassup wit dat? Didn't they get the memo-ette?)
And I guess bi guys are half men and half women inside, so maybe aping a butch lesbian would be the way to go for them.
I guess the best role models for gay males are straight women or at most, butch lesbians. It's a relief to shed the illusion that, despite our beloved penises, we are men at all. Free from internalized homophobia at last, thank Goddess almighty, free at last!
Queer men are not women.We
Queer men are not women.We have penises and a male sex drive.But we are not heterosexual men either we have the brain symmetry and emotional hardwiring of women. We are simply gay men, we can act as "straight" as we want but masculinity is a social construct and why do we want to ape heterosexuality which has proved such a selfish and destructive force.I think people think embracing our true selves is what we should do and if that is unpatriotic and unamerican so what. You yanks amuse me trying to be accepted in christain churches where the bible explicitly forbids homosexuality.Oh but i forgot im a top and dont take it in the ass so im a "real man"thank god for that coz im just so manly and like to kill foreigners.Maybe if im lucky the hard right of the republicans will accept me if I show them what a real man I am.But I love a hard cock in my mouth ....whisper.
The Radical faeries aren't
The Radical faeries aren't just a group for homosexua/gay men only.
There are lots of bisexual, transgendered/transsexual faeries, and even biological women who are part of the faeries.
As far as Harry Hay goes he's so ancient history, full of heterophobia, and I agree with the person who wrote this:
>Though I recognize Hay's courage in founding Mattachine, there is little else in his opus that holds much appeal for me. Socialism, feminist androgyny, romanticizing tribal people, and the notion that homosexual orientation holds some kind of special "consciousness" versus "subject-object" heteros...not my values. I don't think gays discover their real selves by utopian separation from straights any more than separatist "womyn" discovered theirs. I don't discover my individual real self in solitude; I just discover who I am when I'm being solitary. My real self gets enacted in all sorts of places and relationships, especially with people who are unlike me. Unlike Hay, I have little problem with assimilation.<
I also don't understand why so many bi/gay/queer men seem to feel as though they're feminine? I think it's fine if they want to do this but I don't see any compelling reasons why everyone should? I don't feel this way at all and while drag queens and camp can be nice I don't really see it as anything but entertainment, theater, and being fake just for attention.
People can say that some queer men have the emotional hard wiring as women and the brain symetry but I'd bet money that not ALL queer men are this way.
RE: Queer men are not
RE: Queer men are not women.We have penises and a male sex drive.But we are not heterosexual men either we have the brain symmetry and emotional hardwiring of women.
Male body on the outside, high sex drive, female brain and emotions inside. Isn't that what the guy said?
We are simply gay men, we can act as "straight" as we want but masculinity is a social construct
Calling something "a social construct" apparently means that it's just an act or a put-on or a party game. Unfortunately too many people believe that and put on masculinity like makeup, for show. People use the "social construct" line to avoid dealing with things that make them anxious. I wonder what kind of human behavior isn't "a social construct"?
and why do we want to ape heterosexuality which has proved such a selfish and destructive force.
Heterosexuality as selfish and destructive...hmmmm...and homosexuality is...generous and creative? And the back-story here is that heterosexual men are selfish and destructive. Straight men as the enemy of gays and women. As well, for a gay man to develop his natural masculinity gets called "aping".
I think people think embracing our true selves is what we should do
True enough. But what does that mean? Our true selves are the goal of many great spiritual and psychological paths...achieved through great effort. It's far too easy to identify your true self with the current neurotic persona that you are comfortable with. Should a teenager mumble, shuffle and walk stoop-shoulderedly because it's his "true self?" Or should he learn to grow up and walk and talk like a man?
and if that is unpatriotic and unamerican so what.
Hello? When did America come into this? Interesting provocation here.
You yanks amuse me trying to be accepted in christain churches where the bible explicitly forbids homosexuality.
So Mr True Gay Self dislikes Americans. And he has a problem with gays who are Christian. Real generous and creative.
Oh but i forgot im a top and dont take it in the ass so im a "real man"
The sarcasm continues. Very manly argument. Spoken like a true adolescent.
thank god for that coz im just so manly and like to kill foreigners.
So this fella plays the bitchy game further, making being manly and "killing foreigners" equivalent. It's a lot more than that. How about having created civilization? Well, in actual fact, violence can be part of it. Human history is largely a history of war. Mr True Gay Self may wish to ascend nobly above that fray, but it's a fact. Somehow for him, killing foreigners bears a special kind of opprobrium? Is it better kill your fellow countrymen and women?
Maybe if im lucky the hard right of the republicans will accept me if I show them what a real man I am.But I love a hard cock in my mouth ....whisper.
I guess that Mr True Gay Self's idea of masculinity belongs entirely to "hard right"--never sure what that means--, Republican, murderous, Americans who are exclusive tops. Talk about a straw man argument...if you can call name-calling and posturing an argument.
Well, he's partly right, I guess. Take a Navy Seal. Certainly someone who has a claim to manhood, if anyone does. Regardless of party affiliation or sexual position. Mr True Gay Self's problem --or a little part of it-- is that he takes a caricature of an actual man and because he does not match it, bitchily belittles it and proclaims his failure even to engage the issue as some kind of superior status.
The defense of devaluation. Real original.
So Mr real man.Your bitchy
So Mr real man.Your bitchy little adolescent is an ex sas Australian soldier.I have fought for my country and sacrificed my health.Dressing up in a gay bar does not make you a real man.Killing is what I have had to do does not make me a real man.I guess your role model of a real man is Ernst Rohm or maybe that real man closet case Hitler.Men who overindentify with othe r men are usually gay. Heterosexual men are compettitive and fiercely independent.So I guess your failing your test of real manhood. Not much of a real man after all.
RE So Mr real man.Your
RE So Mr real man.Your bitchy little adolescent is an ex sas Australian soldier.I have fought for my country and sacrificed my health.
Aussie dude: if you were SAS, etc as you say, then you ought to make more sense. You’re not making much at all. Sounds like you’re just having a cyber-tantrum.
Example:
Dressing up in a gay bar does not make you a real man.
Absolutely true. And I neither said nor implied anything like that. No how. You made it up. You’re having a fight in your own head. Hardly dealing with me at all.
Killing is what I have had to do does not make me a real man.
Being able and willing to defend your people thru the use of violence…that combination of strength, courage and skill which makes a soldier…that is universally recognized as classical manly behavior. Doesn’t mean you, or any soldier, is perfect, or even decent or moral all the time. Of course not. You may not like it or think it's nice, but this is planet Earth. You sound like you have your regrets or bitterness. Fair enough. But that does not devalue the great men, famous and unknown, who have followed that path. I'm sorry you don'[t seem to value it.
I guess your role model of a real man is Ernst Rohm or maybe that real man closet case Hitler.
How do you jump from Navy Seals to Nazis? Again, you make up this stuff in your head. Unless you’re one of those types who think Amerikkka is the New Nazi Germany, etc. in which case this Yank is here to tell you that you need to read some history.
Men who overindentify with othe r men are usually gay.
Says who? And what does that even mean? “Overidentify”. You mean, like have heroes…which would make all the umpteen millions of men who are passionate sports fans gay?
Heterosexual men are compettitive and fiercely independent.
Again, what does this mean? Take soldiers in combat: massive and close bonding with each other. Not sexual, not gay, but seriously “overidentified”. You can be independent and competitive and still be brothers and friends and buddies, etc.
So I guess your failing your test of real manhood. Not much of a real man after all.
You don’t know what my real test of manhood is…although making sense is a good start…again, you are making stuff up.
Am I a real man? In some ways, yes, in other ways, not. I’m still working on it. And not because someone forced it on me but because it’s who I am. Makes me feel good. Bonds me to other men, including my (straight) friends and my brothers and my father. And when I fail, gives me a reason to keep going. I love the masculinity in other men and in myself. That's what makes this man gay.
I have been reading this with
I have been reading this with great interest since my cousin is gay and my family wish me to accept him. But as tolerant as I would like to be I have to point out some facts.
Real men sleep with women. You cannot be Christain and a practising homosexual as this behaviour is an abomination. Please stay out of our locker rooms and armed forces and take your perversion back in the closet. You can do all the bench presses you like , grow a moustache,wear leather but you are still a sissy cocksucking faggot and you will never be accepted by decent brave men who value femininity.
RE Guy with the gay
RE Guy with the gay cousin.
Internet's a funny place. How does a guy like you wind up reading the blog on DaddyHunt?
Well, at least you're an honest homophobe. An overused term, but in your case, it fits, and I am sure you're ok with that. No love lost for abominable perverted sissy cocksucking faggots who are not real men. Hey, tell us how you really feel! :)
Since I value diversity, I find your candor kinda refreshing. We can't all agree.
Can you be a Christian and a practicing homo? A theological discussion probably not suited to these pages. But I simply point out that after St Paul lays out how sinful men are who "give up the natural use of women and burn with lust for one another" (I'm paraphrasing the second part of Romans 1), he makes his major point in Romans 2, that you are no better, no matter who you think you are. Not a solution, but worth considering.
Do you have to accept your cousin? Of course not. No more than he has to accept you. But for the sake of your family, you might try tolerating him. For the sake of a higher value, you put up with something you don't approve of. Suppose he were straight and turned Buddhist, which would make him both non-Christian and an atheist. You wouldn't like it and would not approve. Fair enough. But unless he became obnoxious about it, you could probably be civil to him over dinner, as long as he reciprocated. Hey, most of my best friends are Democrats. I tolerate that in them them, too, and concentrate on the parts of them that I love. They return the favor to me.
Can a man who has sex with other men ever be accepted by "brave decent men who value femininity"? Well, that depends. Some wouldn't, some would. You don't want to think about or have to see two guys being sexual each other. Creeps you out, I'm sure. (My experience is totally, and I mean totally, opposite! but I understand that I am a minority.) And just having a muscular frame, facial hair and rough clothes isn't enough. No argument there. I think it's a matter of character. And if the character matches the frame and the fur and the finery, it's all to the good for me :) On the other hand, a man who looks like a lumberjack and acts like a teenage girl...I'll pass.
I have a friend now recovering from catastrophic wounds he got as a Marine in Iraq. Fought bravely and honorably and made huge personal sacrifices for the Corps and country and family. So did his partner, another Marine, who lost his legs in the same war. As far as I know them, they have fulfilled all the requirements of manhood, and more, and their sole difference from the norm is their passionate love for each other. And I am not talking just lust here, but love: constancy, reliability, sacrifice, etc.
Would that one thing disbar them from the company of brave and decent men? Does that kind of love, which makes them more than friends and brothers, undo and drain all the value from the rest of the very manly lives of these two wounded heroes?
Or does it open up the possibility, the possibility, that men who love other men, even with their unusual erotic difference, can also be brave and decent men among men? Something to think about.
I have been reading this blog
I have been reading this blog and it has been stirring up some thoughts in my head. Although admittedly im not the most educated man I recall a book by Warren Ferell called the myth of male power. It did not really address this topic specifically but did mention how men in there youth and naivety are drawn into war and conflict in following there gender role and sometimes some men are not suited to this role.But I guess in the real world confict is a part of life.
I find it interesting that some people on here seem to be completely hetero masculine outside of there same sex attraction and take offence to being viewed as in anyway feminine.But I guess this is the same for straight guys too. I really dont fully understand the reason why Im gay but since I am fully manly could my same sex attraction auctally be a whim or choice? Or could I be fully a man who like women is attracted to men?I really dont know the answer though.
What comes to mind as well is the femme / butch divide where if a femme dares suggest gay men are any less than masculine he is attacked. At the same time the femme has little time for the posturing of masculinity. I thought we had the rainbow flag where all our diversity was respected. Though I would never suggest any of our DH guys were nazis this femme/butch divide reminds me of an article I read in the advocate and I think online . It was a neo-con conspiracy where butch gay men who thought femmes were undermining there masculinity and chances for str8 acceptance auctally engineered the "holocaust" of homosexuals and of jews because there religion condemned homosexuality.At the time I greeted it with disbelief but could there be a grain of truth in it considering how we seem to dislike the femme more than the raging homophobe. Though Im sure none of us DH guys would ever embrace that type of hypermasculinity.
But this leaves me with so many unanswered questions about my manhood. Is to be described as feminine in anyway a slur?Can I relate to my heterosexual "brothers" or being a gay will I always be a sister in there minds? Do women like men try and prove there femininity. Is queer theory right when It says gender behaviour and presentation is learned and a social construct? Do I really feel the need to prove my masculinity?Is my empathy and compassion so strong because apparently anon says my emotional hardwiring is female or are these equally possible for a male hardwired brain? So how are we gay guys to act. I've been told im str8 acting and masculine but should I have contempt for the weak wristed and lisping faerie?
Please could someone give me more insight into what being gay is and what masculinity is be that either the soldier or caregiver.
On a break from work today, I
On a break from work today, I thought about how differently I responded to the Aussie gay guy and the homophobic Christian guy. You’re right about that. My reason is that both the homophobic guy and me have one common value: we both honor manhood.
We disagree about who has a right to claim it, but we both honor it, uncomplicatedly.
The Aussie guy, and some of the other gay men commenting on here, have a problem with manhood. For them it’s questionable or worse. And that frustrates the hell out of me. If you look at all the comments about being a “real man” ---notice that it’s in quotation marks—most of them are hostile or dismissive. Whether that comes from feminism or queer theory or some bad experience of being rejected I don’t know. But to me it’s rejecting something that is your natural inheritance. It's a kind of self-hatred.
I have been out and proud for almost three decades, worked in AIDS and still live right inside a big gay ghetto. But I don’t understand anymore why that means I should take on the style and ways of women. I like women. But I’m not one of them. And don’t want to be.
The book that best describes how I feel about all this is one that many gays find really hard to take. It’s called Androphilia. Take a look. It's not subtle, but it makes a lot of sense to me. http://www.jack-donovan.com/androphilia/?p=69
William - Thanks for this
William - Thanks for this well-written piece about Harry Hay and the Radical Faerie movement. I met Harry in 1990 when he was the keynote speaker at the first Gay Spirit Visions Conference at Highlands, NC. That conference was called by the Faeries of Running Water who were grieving the losses in their community from AIDS and who wanted to explore what might be next for them. This year the 20th Gay Spirit Vision Conference will be held at the end of September at Highlands.
GSV incorporated in Atlanta in the mid-90's to continue to explore Gay Spirituality. In addition to the annual Fall conference we hold a Spring Retreat and a Winter Meditation weekend. Check out our homepage at http://www.GaySpiritVisions.org for more information.
GSV is run by a 'Council of Elders' who do the business of negotiating with speakers, renting space, and managing finances. We operate by consensus and have refined that process to work quite well. Harry's keynote address permeates the organization. He spoke around his 3 questions: Who are we? Where have we come from? and What are we for?
For 'men who love men' it is a wonderful place to explore yourself and options for your spiritual development - what it may mean for you to be a man and how you want to manifest that in the world.
That said, I want to share here some personal observations after being involved with this for 20 years.
There is an interesting tenstion in the Gay community between what I call assimilation and separatism. On the one hand, some Gay men have historically appeared "normal" in their everyday lives. Some of us seem quite comfortable keeping our sexuality private while going about our working and public lives. There is no need for these men to figure out anything about being gay. They just are. What they do in bed and with whom is no one else's business.
On the other hand some of us benefit from 'gay only space.' Gay neighborhoods and communities contain gay owned businesses and communities of faith with a focus on celebrating our culture. That often includes drag performers, leather men, bears, etc.
My own motivation for living "out" has been to honor my sexuality as an integral part of my being. I want younger gays to know that there are gay men everywhere. This sense of obligation is driven by my experiences growing up in a culture that "gay bashed" anyone who appeared queer and the psychological and spiritual wounds that ensued.
Bottom line: It isn't a question of one way or the other. Some of us are called to reclaim our culture and celebrate being gay as a positive aspect of our being. We create safe, sacred space for men who love men to find healing and comfort and to explore the gifts our sexuality brings to our lives. Others go about their lives with other priorities which are equally important to the larger community of humankind. Both ways are honorable. Both ways contribute to Life. Blessed Be.
Seems to me that there are as
Seems to me that there are as many ways to be a gay man as there are gay men. My answer to the question of whether I "have the balls to wear a dress," is yes, but I will choose when, where, and what kind of dress, if doing so in fact appeals to my personal sense of choice.
This is a very good blog
This is a very good blog entry. As a gay man who fought with his identity and his religion for the better part of 20 years I believe in thus: Define who YOU are as a gay man. Don't allow society to pigeon hole you into some false sense of what being gay truly is. Not everyone is hyper-feminine, nor is everyone hyper-masculine... there are a whole bunch of grays in there. I am one of those grays.
I would see gay men being unfairly stereotyped in movies and TV as being weak, limp-wristed, lisp-using fairy men. Now there is nothing wrong with that if that is who YOU identify with.
I think the major issue is the pigeon-holing. So what if you like a hard one in your mouth... or a hard one in your ass.... does that make you any more or less of a man? Of course not. Being gay is more then just what is done in the bedroom... that's a very small part of it IMHO and it shouldn't be used to describe us.
Even if some of the comments
Even if some of the comments are from trolls (not really sure), the viewpoints here are surprisingly varied. Gender identity is to be the hot button and I suppose this makes sense given the nature of this site. A lot of guys seem to invest a great deal into the idea of becoming / having become men, as opposed to the boys they were, which may be personally meaningful to them but hopefully they'll excuse those of us who snicker at these distinctions. Perhaps they refer to the development of maturity, but maturity has absolutely nothing to do with gender identity ... yet you have to admit, one cannot say "I am an adult" with the same sense of pride that they might say "I am a man." It's all pretty loaded I guess, and very few people do not derive some significant sense of identity from the gender role they feel they fit into or should fit into.
Anonymous said:
Calling something "a social construct" apparently means that it's just an act or a put-on or a party game. Unfortunately too many people believe that and put on masculinity like makeup, for show. People use the "social construct" line to avoid dealing with things that make them anxious. I wonder what kind of human behavior isn't "a social construct"?
Acknowledging that masculinity is an affect doesn't have to discredit it. So gender roles are roles, not baseline starting points. But they are close enough, since we discover them in early childhood and for most of us they never change (although we might, especially as gay men, find them under attack). On the other hand, does anyone really need to believe they were born masculine because it is so critical to their core self-definition that they are disturbed by the idea that gender identity is a fusion of both semi-innate and voluntary elements? When any one aspect of your self-image seems that important, surely on closer inspection you would find it really isn't, especially as an adult.
The original poster made a point about definitions of the masculine role vary by cultural context. I strongly agree, and would point out that they also vary by subcultural context and by personal experience. Many of us here, loving masculinity as we do, however we might define it, would list a string of wonderful adjectives to describe the masculine mind, but there’d be nothing invalid about someone less enthused with the model men in their life saying that masculinity means selfishness, use of force and compulsion, or irresponsibility. You cannot simply say 'the men they knew were not real men.' What were they then, ladies? Boys? It would seem can't exonerate your favorite gender expression unequivocally without comparing it to another, negatively, and that's plain old bigotry.
So we might do best letting go of the idea that men are x, not y. Instead we ought to recognize that we have an (individual, personalized) masculine ideal, which we admire or emulate or seek in ourselves, without needing others to follow us or getting upset because they do not share our definitions or identify themselves in a contradictory way. [For those of you who speak XML, we each have our own schema and the prefix is integral to the definition of the tag lest there be conflict.]
There's another aspect to all this that this conversation has largely ignored, which is that we invest in these gender definitions sexually as well (I guess it's all ultimately sexual anyway). Stocky, hairy, older men set off masculinity alarms in my mind-crotch axis. Gender definitions are typically more critical in sexuality than identity anyway (I think). How does this factor into how we define ourselves?
Also, it's hard not to see Hay was reacting with a sort of homosexism of his own invention. It's fascinating, but just not true. All the same, I think I see what he was getting at. We probably would benefit from a little more subject-subject, even if it is by no means our exclusive domain.
William, Thanks for the as
William,
Thanks for the as usual, thoughtful and open minded writing. I read a few of the subsequent responses and as I expected, there were many responses to the idea of "real" or "authentic" manhood. Pretty funny really if you can step back and not get hooked by all the opinions and your own stuff. Lord knows there were a couple of moments where I had to stop and keep myself from reacting to a post that pushed my buttons.
I'd like to share not my own opinion, but a book I discovered last summer. Before I go any further, let me just say for anyone who might be thinking he's not interested in a "self help" book, that this book isn't about fixing you, or you fixing yourself. It IS about self exploration though. So if you're not (MAN enough to be) up for taking an honest look at yourself, you wouldn't enjoy
it. ; )
'Dynamic Duos' by Dr. Keith Swain was one of the best books I've ever read on male-male relationship and sexuality. And Lord knows I've read a few... Swain is a gay psychologist with 25 years of gay couples counseling under his belt. He's developed a theory that there are actually 2 different types of gay men. He explains the differences between them, and offers a 4 part "test" (physical traits, sexual preferences, cognitive/mental make-up and emotional orientation) for determining which type you are. It's an easy read, in that while he cites scientific studies to support his theory, the book is written in layman's terms. On the other hand, it also can be a challenging read in that you may find yourself standing at the edge of a chasm between who and how you've always considered yourself to be, and who you really are based on your own answers to the test.
For me finding this book was almost like coming out again. : ) Almost. Over the course of a few weeks as I digested the information, and went back to reread parts of the book, it became clear to me why there were certain aspects of past relationships that never felt quite satisfying to me. And why as I've gotten older, (I'm 46) and gotten to know my true Self better, I see myself, and others very differently than I did even 10 years ago. It also helped me understand how others perceive me based on how I look and act, and helped me understand and more importantly FEEL okay about not having certain characteristics that I always felt I should, despite my most enlightened attempts to convince myself I was fine.
I'm purposely being a little vague here. Everyone's experience of life is different, and so it is with this book. For anyone interested in having a tool that would empower them to have a more naturally authentic relationship with another man, either as friends or as lovers, this book is invaluable.
That was so well put, I can't
That was so well put, I can't think of anything to add except BRAVO!!!
bbb
Hey Billy, Not sure if you're
Hey Billy,
Not sure if you're referring to my post above yours or the author's. But just in case, thank you!
A slight correction: the
A slight correction: the first "Spiritual Conference of Radical Faeries" was Labor Day weekend of 1979 in Benson Arizona.
My first encounter with faeries was 1980, and it was a very diverse group, though at the time all men loving men, and the idea women claiming our identity would have been thought absurd even if it occurred to us. I've been there and back with the faeries, and find myself more or less on the outs now, as a completely different, "pangender" ideology colonized what were safe sexual spaces for men who love men to the point where such spaces are rare among the RFs and seem slated for extinction any day now. The gay mainstream (IMHO strongly influenced by Lesbians who want to wear the white gowns) now seems to be all about conservative couples rights and hetero-imitative marriage and suburban tract homes and having babies and SUVs. Thanks but no thanks.
My take on it was, the RFs of that day were a social experiment which had successes and failures, and was hit or miss. Sometimes there was a great upwelling of healing emotion and
men who had been ostracized by the homophobia outside, could feel safe in heart space. There were also times when this failed to happen, and the gatherings degenerated into raucous drag parties. And sex was, shall we say, an unequal phenomenon, where being young, slender, androgynous was definitely a plus. That said, it saddens me that many of our natural leaders were wiped out in the AIDS epidemic, so that there's not really a good example to offer the new generation, many of whom seem to be lost in meth woods or other self destruction, brought about by the same oppressions we experienced a Saturn revolution ago, but now said not to exist by the mercantile ideology that everything is hunky dory now except for that marriage and SUV.
I would have preferred you
I would have preferred you refer to the late Harry Hay, as the SELF PROCLAIMED father of gay liberation. If you repeat the same thing over and over, and get a few people to put it in writing, it eventually becomes the accepted truth. This seems especially true here in the electronic world where editorial good sense seems to be lacking. Mr.Hay was truly a pioneer, but was hardly the only person involved in Matachine, etc.
I couldn't disagree more with
I couldn't disagree more with Mr. Schindler's views. I am a black man who is also "gay", for those who like such labels (see Foucault on labeling as a form of domination). Notions of separatism as a means of self-affirmation, escape from discrimination and creation of an "authentic" culture free from the repressive norms of the majority is an old debate among African-Americans; and they are wrong. Self-segregated identity movements have always either collapsed due to unsustainability, or worse, have degenerated into narrow, closed micro-societies turned in on themselves. This in turn almost always creates immense pressures for conformity, lack of creativity and its own forms of repression. One need only look at certain self-segregated religious communities to see this in action: the Hasidim within Judaism, the tiny numbers of Zoroastrians that survive in Iran and India, those Mormons in the American Southwest who still follow their founder's teachings on polygamy and patriarchy. The creation and maintenance of these identities are only possible within the context of extreme self-segregation and rigorous policing of deviance within their communities. True, those who fully identify with such closed worlds have a sense of security that few who live in the larger world ever will. Yet I would maintain that it comes at too high a price: creativity, autonomy, spontaneity, the truncating of one's larger humanity. As for gay men, how many of us have noted a tendency toward uniformity, insularity, exclusivity and lack of originality even within the limited "gay ghettos" one sees in certain parts of the Castro in S.F., around Dupont Cirle in D.C. or certain enclaves in Chelsea in NYC? Imagine this expanded many fold in a segregated gay world! I follow the radical theorist Samir Amin's assessment of exclusivist identity politics as a manifestation of the insecurity, weakness and historical defeats suffered by those practicing them. They are a dead end practiced by those who have reached an impasse in their struggles for liberation: the so-called Nation of Islam, et. al., whose social basis has always been the most marginalized and disenfranchised African-Americans. The alternative is genuine liberation that challenges the hegemony of oppressive norms in their entirety, not just on behalf of this or that group, and in coalition with others who have an interest in genuine social transformations.
FFS!! All men are real men,
FFS!!
All men are real men, some people just need to get over it.
Just because you have lots of muscle and fur, doesn't make you any more of a man than the skinny twink with the makeup.
"you're born naked, all the rest is just drag"
Post new comment