Questions

[Bester]

Interesting place to join this board ;). Hi everyone, and hello again to those of you that know me from elsewhere. Lots of interesting points been made, some of which I agree with, some of which I disagree with. If I may, a few thoughts on some random issues which have been raised.

Old Skool vs New Skool queerness

To talk about coming out and role models and anything of that nature as simply a matter of "things are different now than they used to be" is horribly reductive. Context is much more than a matter of time. As drake pointed out a while back, location makes a difference to how feasible it is to be out or not. Also, putting things down to time ignores the human element. Even now, people my age (twenty two) are shit scared to come out for whatever reason. Even back in the 50s and 60s, people were coming out and maybe not waving rainbow flags (well, stonewall excepted), but not hiding who they were, either. No one held guns to gay men's heads and MADE them get married. My uncle's been with his current partner for over 20 years. He grew up in rural New Zealand in the 60s and my granddad was a conservative old Englishman. Sure, there was more societal pressure back in the day, but thats what it was, pressure. Not compulsion. To intimate that there was no choice but to stay in the closet and/or get married (not saying anyone here has done that, but I have had the sentiment expressed to me by more than a few people in other contexts) is to denigrate the bravery of the people who didn't.

So in summary, yes, things are different now, but people aren't. Individual bravery, cruelty, tolerance, timidity existed then as now, and its these things that are the determining factor of who's out and who's not, in my opinion.

Role Models

A role model to me is someone I both respect and can identify with. Thus, someone who is gay who I respect makes me feel kinda good about being gay. But equally, I like weird ass obscure music, so someone who I respect who also shares that interest makes me feel good bout the music I like. As a recent law graduate, I look up to michael kirby (mentioned several times previously by graeme) because he is an outstanding judicial mind AND because hes fearless about his sexuality. Equally, I look up to the respected partner at the firm I'm about to start at who is both a great lawyer and has fantastically similar taste in music to me. The point of this ramble is that I think role models are important for everyone, including gay people, but that role models don't need to be gay. It may simply be that I had far bigger insecurities growing up than my sexuality, I never did the self hate thing cos I was gay. I'm sure that for people with issues like that, specifically gay role models are more important.

Queer community

Gay men are men who like to screw men. Lesbians are women who like to screw women. Bi people like both. Transgender people exist on a completely different continuum. Sexual indentity is different from gender identity. By all accounts, a "GLBT" community shouldn't work. There's actually very little in common aside from wanting to sleep with people of the same gender, and thats not strictly true of the transgender people in the equation. But it does work, to an extent, because most people in all those groupings feel a sense of otherness, of not belonging. There are some things that other queer people can understand that even the most understanding straight friend can't. Thats not to say we should ghettoise ourselves - I have more straight male friends than gay ones - simply that there is a value in being able to share alienation.

Saying that, to some extent the whole thing doesn't work. The (very) thinly veiled distaste I've seen displayed here and elsewhere for effeminate gay guys is symptomatic of that. "They're different". "They rock the boat". "They make things difficult for us people who act more normal". Which, I guess, is probably true. I personally find the whole wrist flap and feather boa mannerism a bit irritating but christ, most of my friends find at least half of what I do incredibly irritating, too. Whats the difference ibetween saying that people shouldn't be allowed to walk around in gold hot pants and wave pompoms and saying that dudes shouldnt be allowed to shag other dudes? When you get right down to it, there's no conceptual difference. If we can't deal with the idiosyncracies of people who's exclusion we've shared, how intolerant are we, really?

Anyway, there we go, a few long winded thoughts from me. Like I said, I've enjoyed reading this discussion, so I think I'll be sticking around for a while :)

[blue]

My sincere thanks to Gabriel for reminding us of the purpose of this thread and our common interests. Also, my thanks to Gabe for reminding us that it's possible to be rightfully willing to stand up and do something, but to mediate too, even when you're aggravated.

Thanks to Graeme and Bester for comments to help the discussion along.

Welcome, Bester. Hope you enjoy it here.

------

I would like to point out something I think this thread has missed. There has been a lot of talk of "tribe" and "us / gay people" and "them / straight people." I'm part of a tribe, a family, a group? Cool! -- As long as it isn't an exclusive (exclusionary) club that doesn't need the secret handshake and decoder ring. -- You see, we don't need to think in terms of "us" and "them." We must not, if we want to keep our gay-friendly straight friends. We must not, if we want to change the minds of straight people who are willing to think. There *are* straight folks who visit here and who care a lot about their gay friends. That is amazing. It is something we should keep in mind, me included.

[Guest]

Hello Gentlefolk,

I have watched this thread with extreme interest and have held off weighing in until now. For those of you who know me either from Deweywriter, or personal emails exchanged back and forth with me, this missive will probably come as no surprise as I tend to have deeply held beliefs when tendering an opinion on this particular topic matter.

Years ago, I had adopted two brothers, Russians whom I deeply love and in turn they love me. More so, my boys accepted me as a Gay man, their adopted ?Dad,? but more so as a human being prone to making errors as is our collective nature. Ironically, it was in the times before the Internet's spreading influences and the marvelous stories that sprang forth, that my youngest decided upon a comfortable and very funny label that he felt best suited me; My Dad is a Vampire. In a flawless display of teenaged logic coupled with the cultural Russian sensibilities deeply ingrained within my son, he explained his rationale for arriving at that conclusion. ?Papa, Vampires drink blood, da?? ?Well Gays drink blood products...? Needless to say it took awhile to pry me off the floor where I was stuck in helpless laughter.

So I speak to all of you as an ?Elder? in the ancient Council of the Tribe of the Vampires..........(With a grin and nod to my dear friend Comicality's Gone from Daylight and the combined talents of Jaden & Toren's wonderful tale Light of Day, Dark of Night.) In all due seriousness, I have said to many that I have communicated with, that the generalized perception of our society is that, indeed, Gays are little more than Vampires recruiting the innocent youth to add to their flock. But before you naysayers cry foul, think about that statement carefully. It doesn't matter what label you use, Gabriel's use of pedophile being the most accurate and appropriate.

What this entire thread has done is spelled out in specific relief the greatest problem that confronts Gays and Lesbians world-wide. Your arguments, sharp disagreements, and the very divisiveness of the topic shows just how deeply the wounds of just one word have festered in the tribe overall. That word my friends is Perceptions.

A simple word, but a very complex series of issues that as you all have found in this thread can have a splintering effect even within a community as small as this one here at Awesomedude. Before I continue I will state for the record that I am not going to take a position on this subject, rather I would ask of all you who read this thread, respond to it, or merely lurk in the mists of cyberspace and happen upon this, to merely reflect on the contents and context as it applies to YOU, as an individual.

By all rights, that is where all of this stems from. Perceptions. Yours, his, society, queer or straight it truly doesn't matter. What does matter is how in a very revelant way this argument applies to you, as a man, woman, but much more so, a homosexual human being. A role model? Hmm, I am a Vampire according to ?perceptions.? Drive a stake thru my heart and I will be finished, better yet, expose me to daylight and I will turn into a crispy critter.

The largest motivation that propels a vast segment of the Gay Tribe is fear. Fear of exposure, fear of the unknown, fear of being a corrupter of youth and labeled as such, and finally the fear of being outcast as being perceived by others as not normal. I can tell you with some authority that is the case.

For the younger set, it is hard to see the gains the tribe as a whole has made since the heady days of Stonewall, and other significant events. For the older set, it is hard to function in a positive role model for the young, for fear of being perceived as a child molester.

Some might say, as would I, it is a classic Joseph Heller definition of his immortal ?Catch-22.? So what is the answer? It is complex and ever changing. But it all begins with individuals, who are willing to let their world, be it here online, or be it real life, know, that the sexual part of their being that is gender biased, truly has no impact on the quality of their character.

I am a Vampire, and you know what? Who cares? It's a part of me, just like breathing air, or expressing my love for my sons, friends, or others I meet along the way in this journey we call life. I am not alone.............

[Guest rusticmonk86]

Good show, GBP.

[Dewey]

I admit that I have come to this thread late, and I have not had the time to read the entire thread, so if you want to blast me for something after I'm done, start there.

I skimmed through some of this and have been struck by the over all tone that has developed. As GPB said, there is one things that we are struggling with. Our tribe, community, "kind" -- whatever you want to call it -- is fighting perceptions.

We are perceived as perverts, molesters, predators, deviants and so on by roughly 40% of the country. We know why this is the case as well: societies rooted in "moral values" have condemned homosexual activity for whatever reasons they have to do so. Whether we like it or not, we are battling a perception that was formed some 5000 years ago in a time where being a homosexual could literally ruin a family. Why? Because 5000 years ago, everyone in the family was used as farm equipment, from herding goats and cattle to working in the fields. As people aged, the children were expected to pick up the slack so the family could continue to survive. No children equates to no new equipment, dooming the family to fail.

Up until recently, perhaps even into and through World War II, this held true. It wasn't until very recently that people had to take into account the cost of having children, because in a modern urban society, children provide no "benefit" until they are legally able to work and contribute to the family by the currency they can earn. It is a very real issue.

There seems to be an undercurrent in this thread, at least what I've gleaned from what I've read, of an Animal Farm-esque attitude: All (in the tribe) are created gay, but some are gayer than others. In particular, I am refering to a comment made by Tragic Rabbit. This is not meant to disparage or criticize him at all, but it does an excellent job of illustrating this:

The married guys who love their wives and post, that's cool...sort of. I mean, its their lives but don't they have at least a little explaining to do to a younger gay guy who asks them Why?

The perception is that because someone is married, that they are less worthy of engaging in or benefiting from the struggle, and that their claim of homosexuality is suspect. Why can't a person who is married be gay, or why is he less worthy, for lack of a better word? No one knows, nor can anyone know what circumstances existed that put us where we are today, in some cases even the person in question. Why question their assertion? Because we ourselves have not experienced their situation, and therefore it is not real? If that is the case, then why not question the sexuality of people who act in ways we don't, be they effeminate or straight-acting?

For myself, I did not understand I was gay until I was in my late twenties. I have recently worked out why this is the case, and I won't go into it here because it isn't germaine to this particular post. In any case, I had been married for nearly four years with a child before all the pieces fell together. Should I not have a stake in what we are fighting for because of this? Should someone whose situation is so grim that they feel forced to wed against their nature have a smaller interest?

My brothers, we are all the same in two very important ways: We are human, and we are gay. The circumstances of our current existence have no effect on this.

We are different in two very important ways: One, because we are human and possess the infinite individualism that is implied, and two, none of us have experienced the exact same events. This is a benefit, not a detriment, because through all that variety and experience, we have the ability to work toward the equality we desire and deserve. If some person makes an accusation against us as a whole, such as all gay's are effeminate, or that all gays are after is sex, there are numerous examples to prove this is not so.

One last thing before I sign off this completely out of context post:

We must understand that not everyone has the same freedoms and capabilities as everyone else. Gabriel, aqnd others who work as activists, I applaud you for your dedication and courage to tackle this war head-on. For those of us who are married, however, we have families and in some cases, children we are responsible for. Should we abandon our families to fight on the front lines? Should we abdicate the responsibilities we have taken on and literally destroy the lives of four or more people?

I'm not asking for a judgement from anyone since these are decisions that the individual makes according to their own heart and mind. I, for one, will stay with my family, raise my children, and do what I can within the limits of my obligations. This is all I can do and maintain my own sense of self and my own sense of honor.

I respect on some level. Each of you has a unique perspective on the world. Each of you has unique circumstances in your life. It would be a mistake to assume everyone has the same options available to them. Each will do as they can given their own situation. If they choose to sit in the background, then they have their reasons, and we must respect their decision whether we agree with it or not.

That's it. I'm done.

[Guest]

so i've come to this conversation very late, but i have read through most (read: not all) of this conversation, and i have a few insights/ opinions to ply you with. i will try to keep this short because this thread is so long i don't want what i'm saying to get lost among the multitude.

and for those of you that don't know me and why i may have some seemingly strange ideas, here's a really brief background: i am a 20 (almost 21!) year old, jewish woman, living in los angeles. i am engaged to a wonderful man who i love dearly. i grew up in major urban areas throughout the country, including the south and new england. i consider myself transgendered in that i honestly would feel more comfortable as a man. but there are people and things in my life (mostly my fiance) that would be irrevocably changed if i were to do anything about my "gender identity" so i am making the choice not to. i have been invovled in relationships with people of both sexes, but i am generally more attracted to men. and last but not least, i have many gay and lesbian and bisexual (and yes, even trans!) friends, both online and irl. so that's where i'm coming from.

Rules to live by-

1.Even if you and I don't agree, I respect you and we can coexist in peace.

2.Your way may not be my way, I will work to welcome your differences.

3.I will celebrate the diversity between us.

4.I will work through the changes life brings.

5.I will challenge narrow mindedness.

6.I will try to keep my relationships with others uncomplicated.

7.I will try to welcome different viewpoints and learn from them.

8.I realize that others can teach me something new about myself daily.

9.I know that the world is much bigger than you and me.

10.I know that the world is much more interesting with you and me in it.

-[Jewish] Anti-Defamation League

tr, it's ironic that you put this up (or at least for me) because my father is pretty heavily involved in the adl and i grew up with these ideals.

in my experience (and it may be very odd because of the liberal environs i grew up in) as a person who generally comes accross as "straight," most straight people really do not have a problem with gblt people. they may not appreciate certain individuals, they may make jokes in bad taste, but they truly do not hate them. they also do not just see stereotypes. i have almost never encountered someone who thought all gay people are effeminate or pedophiles, or whatever.

it seems to me that this conversation about role models is kind of skewed. you all want ideal role models, who are just like you and without faults. unfortunately, we are not infallible. i don't remember who said it, but i definitely agree that the best any "role model" can do is live their lives as best as possible and try to help out and give reassurances to those they care about when they're needed. not all straight people get married, not all straight people are successful or comfortable in their own skin. so why the expectation be that gay adults have to measure up to this impossible standard? i understand about "putting your best foot forward" etc, but really, nobody can be that perfect all the time. sure, i want a great role model, but honestly, i think the pick-and-choose idea is much more realistic. admire someone for one quality, but not necessarily another. (an opitionated example) bill clinton was a great presdient, but a bad husband.

the racism and the stereotyping within the gay community is something that i have seen/ experienced first hand. honestly, i have stopped identifying myself as bisexual or trans or anything because any kind of statement to that effect usually results in either a scoff or a lecture. i can't be bisexual if i'm with a man, and i can't be trans if i'm not trying to get a sex change. the lgbt "tribe" is the last place that any of this should be happening, and yet i think this reaction is one of lashing out in both fear and anger. because we feel so oppressed and marginalized, we in turn marginalize others to make ourselves feel better.

the gay community needs to learn from other minority communities. surviving and thriving as an oppressed people has been done before and is entirely possible (the jews have been around for 5,000+ years), but for that to happen, lgbt people need to stop the name calling, divisive behavior that has been mentioned. effeminate gay men, butch lesbians, black trans women (hi, ru) should all be valued for their contributions to the community along with those "straight acting" gay men and lipstick lesbians. and lashing out at other groups is certainly the wrong idea. the whole "breeders" "straights" thing, i've heard plenty of lgbt people make comments like "eew, look at that breeder, hate to see what his kids will be like." it's just as bad as "fags" and "eew, that's so gay." (which, as an aside, i barely hear)

i have to get back to my class right now, so i'm gonna stop here. i might add something later, but i don't want to repeat myself, so maybe i won't. that's my queer two cents.

-pr

[blue]

Thanks, y'all. Dewey and Plastic, good to see you here again.

Plasticreality made a point about marginalizing I'm going to pick up.

Within the "GLBT community," such as here, each of us is familiar with what other people (including other GLBT people) say about being gay, lesbian, bi, trans... or any of the huge number of labels for this or that, some of which are ones I've never heard. Those labels are too often hurtful and ugly. They reduce a person to a label, a word: "Faggot," for instance. "Are you gay?" Too many times heard with a sneer, baiting. The words "pervert" or "abomination" used in a place of worship, to describe people who do anything sexual with someone of the same gender.

Because we've often grown up hearing things like that, including applied to each of us, we internalize some of it. "Am I a bad person for feeling this, for doing this, even for just thinking this? What would anyone think? What would God think? What do I think?"

What incredible harm this does to us as youth, as adults, and it is so subtle we don't realize it. -- Until someone we think is like us questions something. "What? I thought you understood. Aren't you just like me?" The disappointing conclusion that you aren't exactly like me, the isolation of that, the wondering if anyone truly understands. None of us completely understand, not even ourselves.

We must "get over it." We must find a way to accept differences among ourselves.

------

This divisiveness does exist in other minority communities. Yes, we're a minority community. It comes from insecurity about self and group and personal experience. It comes from honest differences of opinion and how to solve problems. Look in other minority communities and you will see disagreements over who is right, who is more entitled to belong, who does more to help the community, etc. (That sounds silly and petty and absurd, but it is true.)

I am a part of another minority community because of my eyesight; I'm "visually impaired." (No matter what term, it sounds vague.) So I know how other physically challenged people are treated and how they can be together and how they feel inside. There are some things very much in common between the two groups, in how they are perceived and how people within each group interact.

-----

I was hoping I could pull up some "profound observation." Sorry, nothing profound, just me rambling.

[djiefu]

Gabe asked in his original post about what he called ?elders? and role models, and after having read so many follow up posts I?d like to add my few cents worth, the fruit of close to 70 years of life.

I have been oriented towards other males since I was 4 years old. I grew up before the word gay was ever used to refer to those of us whose emotional, psychological and sexual attraction is to people of our own sex. Homosexuality was never mentioned publicly and the first time I was aware that someone I knew was supposed to be a man who liked men was when I was a teenager. I wanted to talk to him but I was terrified. It was many years later and only when I joined our local gay group and met him that I had the old story confirmed. So who were my role models then? There were none. I stayed well and truly in the closet. It was after all the 1950s, the era of conformity, and I was already a non-conformist in the worst way: a political activist in movements for peace and social justice. I became a teacher in a small rural school. It was enough that I was political. Had I come out as a ?poof? I hesitate to think of the local reaction! So I remained closeted.

In 1971 I attended the first public meeting held here to campaign for an end to the discriminatory laws against male-male sexual activity. The founders of the movement became my first gay role models (and personal friends later on) but I still didn?t come out. But my gayness began to bubble to the surface. I began to read as more books with gay characters began to be published. I became aware of the contribution that men and women same-sex lovers had made to humanity. To achieve my personal liberation I went overseas and returned five years later, having learned to love and be loved, to join the gay movement in a variety of very active roles. And in the years since my retirement from teaching, I have come further and further out of the closet, to the point that I was featured in a display, ?The Gay Museum?, that ran for months at the State Museum here in 2003, and participate each year now in the annual gay pride parade as a member of our teachers? union glbti group. As a teacher, I never came out to my students, (though later, some - gay boys - told me they suspected it) I did not have the courage, unlike some close friends and colleagues?but then the laws of my state ending, as far as possible, legal discrimination against gays and lesbians were only enacted in 2002, and there is still a long way to go in promoting the changes in the Australian community.

The point I am making is that coming out is a process. A theory of stages of coming out was developed by a lesbian psychologist in Western Australia, Dr Vivienne Cass, in the late 1970s. Brew Maxwell in Chapter 6 of the final segment of the Foley-Mashburn Saga, Boyhood?s End, summarises the theory for those interested. (You can find the story through links in The Mail Crew?s site if you haven?t yet read it.) It is very easy to tell gay people of any age that they should come out. Coming out is not easy, as Drake and Graeme and others have pointed out in this discussion. It is and will always remain a personal decision, determined by a huge variety of factors. I hope the time will come when we have no need for ?Coming Out?, but for now, let us rejoice that over 30 years ago, many brave people, in many countries around the world, began the process of making us visible and thus helping to create the conditions for our eventual liberation. They are worthy role models.

I will end here with what I have said elsewhere: let us all keep on developing our gay consciousness. Let?s take advantage of the internet and the many publications now available, both fiction and non-fiction, to read widely and keep abreast of the developments in all over the world which, bit by bit, are leading in the direction of true gay liberation, the time when we will have no need to proclaim our difference.

[carolinascribbler]

Very well said.

[blue]

blue as admin

Hey everyone,

Just a quick note to explain that plasticreality had some tech difficulties with her member name, which will be solved shortly. In the meantime, she re-registered with the plural (plasticrealities).

This note is to explain that once things are cleared up with her original singular name, she'll be back to it, and the plural one will go in the ol' bit bucket, lost in the ethernet, and so the plural one will show up as Guest rather than Member.

Just wanted to let y'all know everything's fine, she didn't drop off the edge of the web or anything. Being plastic, she's very adaptable. :)

~Blue / as forum admin

[Bester]

Just had a random thought pop into my head. Seems to me that a lot of the disagreement that has occurred in this thread centres around what people see as the ideal gay community. Is the ideal society one which treats gay people just the same as everyone else, or is it one in which gay people are acknowledged as different and society as a whole changes to allow that difference to thrive and inform the rest of society.

So which one is better? This is not a simple question.

A similar distinction has existed for decades in the feminist movement - liberal femisits who want equality, and radical feminists who want society to be remodelled and rebuilt without a pro-male bias (and cultural feminists are in the middle there somewhere). There are still many, many proponents of both views. Radical feminists argue that equality and integration is tantamount to relinquishing any distinctive female characteristics and being assimilated into a society which still has pro male assumptions. Liberal feminists argue that the radical's agenda simply serves to ghettoise women.

I think both points of view have merit and both perspectives can be meaninfully applied to they gay community.

So, in the spirit of this thread, another question, and I'd be interested to here what people think.

Is it better for gay people to be treated just like everyone else, or is it better to have our differences acknowledged, celebrated, and form part of our identity?

Whats my answer? I'm not sure. Yeah its a copout, but I'm the one asking the question. Maybe I'll have an answer once I've thought for a bit ;).

[Graeme]

Is it better for gay people to be treated just like everyone else, or is it better to have our differences acknowledged, celebrated, and form part of our identity?

I don't think I can answer this one properly, because I don't think I can satisfactory address the identity of what "our differences" are. If you restrict this to one of sexual orientation, then I think it is better for gay people to be treated just like everyone else, as it is essentially a private activity that distinguishes us.

However, it is not hard to push the definition out further and look at the differences that a family with same-sex parents can bring to society. Yes, that's right -- a family. If we are accepted, then the ability to adopt, or to have children by artificial insemenation (for lesbian couples) must be assumed.

There is a reasonable amount of research that indicates that children with two parents of the same sex do not suffer when compared to a more traditional family. I know this is acknowledged in the region I live, as the local paper had a series of articles last year on the problem of a lack of foster carers, and the agencies concerned explicitly stated in the newpaper articles that they were happy to have homosexual singles and couples as foster carers.

Do families of this sort offer something different to society that should be acknowledged? Or is it just another family structure, to go along with the nuclear family, the single parent family and the extended family?

Are there other areas, ie. outside of the bedroom, where being gay offers something different to society? I can't think of any myself, but then I haven't considered the question for very long. I am explicitly ignoring the various sub-cultures that we have talked about before because they are not unique to the gay community. ie. There are straight effeminate men, there are straight butch women, there are straights into leather, etc.

At the moment, I have to tend toward saying I want society to treat us the same as everyone else, but that's because I can't think of a difference that can be offered to society as a benefit to be celebrated. If someone offers one, I'm happy to change my mind.

The only thing I've managed to come up with is simply diversity -- in other words the difference itself is one that could be acknowledged by society, rather than just accepted. However, it's not like a racial, ethnic or religious difference, where it can enrich the experiences of those around us (the sort of thing I'm talking about is an Aboriginal Corrabaree, a Maori Haka, a Native American Ceremony, a Buddhist Wedding, etc). Our essential difference appears to be a private matter. It would be like society acknowledging people based on their favourite sexual position....

My opinions only, and none of them are particularly strongly held. Feel free to try to change them :D

Graeme

[plasticreality]

yay, my singularity has been restored, thanks blue :)

in any case, back to the question at hand: i think that the ultimate would be, for the most part, a complete integration into society. as graeme pointed out, there really aren't any exterior differences and the sexual ones shouldn't have that much of a bearing on your daily life (meaning, you don't have to inform everyone you meet at the beginning of the conversation that you're gay, and then only talk about that).

i think a similarity can be drawn to how some of the more culturally self-aware "white" cultures exist here in the states. no one thinks they're "different," no big deal is made of it, but they are proud of their heritage, will tell you about it, are aware of their history, and active in their community. people seek out others similar to them, so yes i think there probably always will be a "tribe" but it doesn't need to be as closed or protective as it is now.

about the same-sex parents thing, i grew up/ went to school with a few kids who had same-sex parents (two that had 2 moms, one that had 2 dads). all of those kids were the biological child of one of the parents, and i'm not sure how much of an affect that had on how they felt, but they were all fine with it. they're all great people and so are their parents. i honestly don't think that the gender of the parents matters. wether they are caring and loving and just overall good parents is the important thing. as far as the whole nature vs. nurture thing about being gay? well, one of the girls wound up bi, but the other girl and the boy are both straight. dunno what exactly that proves or not, but interesting to think about.

me? i had two parents, one of each gender. they had a pretty awful relationship for most of my latter childhood and it certainly made my life difficult. i would much rather have had my mom marry a woman (long story, different conversation) than stay with my dad if it would've made them both happy.

[aj]

I think that my ideal society is one in which the differences are acknowleged and allowed to be expressed and not judged. I think that there is a distinct gay sub-culture, which we have been forced to develope and which is worth keeping. I've never liked the 'melting pot' image, preferring instead the image of a tapestry, with many threads all combined to create a greater whole.

cheers!

aj

[blue]

I'd prefer that society acknowledge and accept the differences. I don't want to simply be homogenous or assimilated. Then I'd be a copy, a robot, a Borg drone, even. (That assimilation, don'tcha know.)

Seriously, though, the variety and differences are unique and valuable. A woman has different sensibilities than a man. A black or latino or Asian or Amerind (Native American) has a distinctly different culture than a white American -- and I don't want to lose what's great about those cultures, white-boy that I am. The way those differences combine brings about whole new ideas and creations. Rock and Roll, Fusion cuisines, creole food and languages... all sorts of things... they all came from how people found a way to get along with each other. Oh, how amazingly starry-eyed that sounds. OK, feet back on the dirty ground and take off the rosy specs.

I don't want GLBT people to have to give up what makes us unique. I want a culture where it is not considered wrong or crazy or criminal to be gay and to express those feelings openly to anyone, just like a straight person can. I want people to stop assuming that being gay means being some kind of kook or predator. Normal.

It must be OK to be different, to be GLBT.

[Bester]

This to me is the paradox. If we want to be seen as different, how can we meaningfully asking to be treated the same. Further, as far as I can see, the whole GLBT community is united by a sense of not belonging in the general community. Can such a disparate community with so little in common continue to exist if the sense of not belonging disappears? I'm not sure it can.

[Codey]

I don't think there is such a thing as normal or abnormal in nature. Anything, and that includes homosexuality, that is a part of what nature or God made us is normal.

There are majorities and minorites in nature and majorities always struggle to maintain their dominance while minorities struggle for acceptance. If, in our struggle for acceptance, we are seeking "normalcy" then we are concedeing to a false arguement, by the majority, that we are abnormal.

I belong to several minorities and am struggling for acceptance in ALL of them. I will concede the point of minority but I will never concede abnormality on any of them.

[Graeme]

I don't think there is such a thing as normal or abnormal in nature. Anything, and that includes homosexuality, that is a part of what nature or God made us is normal.

There are majorities and minorites in nature and majorities always struggle to maintain their dominance while minorities struggle for acceptance. If, in our struggle for acceptance, we are seeking "normalcy" then we are concedeing to a false arguement, by the majority, that we are abnormal.

I belong to several minorities and am struggling for acceptance in ALL of them. I will concede the point of minority but I will never concede abnormality on any of them.

A good point, even if I disagree on a technicality.

A pediatrician wrote in a book I read once. "I've never met an average child, but I've met lots of normal children."

Normal covers a lot wider range of possibilities than does the term "average". In our particular case, I agree with Codey in that normal is wider than the "majority". Homosexuality is normal -- a fact acknowledged by the medical community when it was taken off the list of mental health illnesses.

My disagreeance is on a technicality. There are "abnormalities" in the world and we should acknowledge that. But these should be determined on scientific/medical basis, not on a "majority/minority" basis, as you point out. One thing that struck me in recent news articles was the comment from Canada that they don't put civil rights to a majority vote, because they will always lose. This supports what Codey is saying.

One of our problems is that the medical/scientific acknowledgement of homosexuality as "normal" has not filtered through to the general community. So when we are seeking "normalcy", we are asking society to recognise our "normalcy", something already done by some sections of the community, but not others.

Graeme

[blue]

I'd like to add something I realized last night, thinking about this thread and how it relates to other minorities. Earlier, I mentioned that there are a few things the GLBT community has in common with the handicapped community. Last night, I was amazed to realize there was one other point in common I'd never considered. Dang, I wish I'd thought of it a long time ago.

Handicapped people "come out" almost every time we meet someone new, but I'll bet we don't think of it like that. I sure didn't. What on earth am I talking about? Whether a handicapped person's physical limitation is plainly visible or not, he or she has to "come out" soon after meeting someone new.

We state our orientation (type of physical impairment). We say what it means to the relationship (what the limits are and how we adapt to do things). We answer the usual questions to educate and address misconceptions, and because people are often both genuinely curious and don't know much about it or how to deal with someone who is like this.

We deal with various things that isolate us from other people, and they are very similar to what GLBT people go through. Some people are fine with it, others have problems. The problems can include prejudice, harrassment, and old ideas about sickness or rightness. There are also people who understand right away and help a lot, simply by being considerate and friendly, as well as directly helping.

Handicapped people have issues with our own feelings toward our difference and with how our families, friends, loves, or strangers deal with us.

If we know someone long enough, we may even have to remind them that we are handicapped and can't do something the same way they can. Yes, they actually can forget, even when it's obvious, because they just don't think about it or don't notice the difference any more.

It's very funny (humorous and disconcerting) that I hadn't realized that what I do fairly often, like other handicapped folks, is something like "coming out." But I think it may help me, deal with coming out about being gay. That's got to be a plus.

[Ryan_Keith]

Hi, I'm not much of a contributor to this thread, and I haven't even read all of it (sorry, I'm really running out of time, but I will indeed come back because from what I've read, [first page only], this is a very interesting topic), and everyone seems to bring out valid points.

For those who don't know me, I'm a writer. I saw Aaron from the mailcrew mention something interesting happening here, and his site brought me here. I know a lot of teens wish they had gay role models growing up. I really grew up with out one. But then again, I figured myself as someone with a good head on my shoulders, most of the time. I wasn't a perfect teen, hell, I'm in my last year as one. So I'm border line adult. Now given the choice as a teen if I wanted a gay role model, I would have said 'Why?'.

I know they really can shed some knowledge to the teens, but at that age, I could definitely remember not wanting to look up to anyone. I never had a role model. I didn't want to be like my parents (no matter how great they were), I wanted to be myself. The sense of individuality was very appealing to me.

And it wasn't until I was 17 when I decided to say, "Screw what people think, I'm living the way I want to." And I did that without any guidance. Now I did have support, so I guess my situation was a little different. I know the biggest fear for teens is rejection from those who are supposed to love them. Where do they go if they get the boot? My mom recently told me of a little girl she knew who got booted from her house because of something as trivial as going to a friend's party. She had permission from the mom, but not the dad. So when she asked to get picked up, he said don't come home. My mom told me detail by detail how the child had a breakdown. The girl was only 13.

There may be a reason to why teens need to hide they are gay. And if they think their parents will put them out, I say stay in the closet, use the parents for their money, then when you are old enough to support yourself, tell em. That might sound a bit cruel I know.

As for adult, I'm pretty sure people mentioned this fact, many adults are afraid to come out because it compromises their current situation. They might have kids, and a wife. I'm pretty sure the original poster didn't intend this, but what if someone did come out to their family and it tore them apart. The wife files for divorce and he can't see his kids? Is that martyrdom? Will a closeted gay teen think, "Damn that took some balls to do, I can come out now!"

Truth is, it isn't that simple. I hated getting advice to people. It made me feel weak. That's me though. I was always the one to be controlling of situations. If I wasn't in charge, I feared where things were headed (Mind you this doesn't apply to relationships. My significant other would easily whoop my ass if he needed to^^). As a teen growing up, if some gay guy tried to help me come out by tell me his successes of coming out, it would have no effect on me.

It's the way I am I think. I'm not at all involved in the gay community in any shape or form. I didn't join any clubs when I got to uni, nor do I go pubbing in downtown in the gay district. But I know so many people who do. And so far, most gay people I've met personally, like that kind of scene. They find nothing wrong with hooking up with a random person. But then again, most of their straight friends are too. When spring break hits, there is always random sex going on in places. Mexico, Cancun, all the college people go there to have fun and have random sex.

In this day and age, I don't think the problem is having the guts to come out anymore. Actually, more and more teens are coming out. A lot of my readers are teens, who have come out and that surprises me. I didn't actually accept myself as a gay guy until my last year in HS. And here I have teens saying they are out.

I never wanted my sexuality to define who I was. I'm gay, but it doesn't make me want to shout it out at the student center. There's a big difference in the years we live now than long ago when the adults were young. People are more educated. And thanks to media, homosexuality is a topic being more and more explored. It is also thanks to media, that teens think it's acceptable to sleep around. I think that's the bigger fear in these years.

Too many people having random hookups. People who don't want to be tied down. I've gotten a lot of criticism about my work where the characters have great relationships, but I'm also told they don't exist in the world. And that if they do, it's rare. Recently I met another gay guy my age. And based on our lifestyles we could never be friends. He thinks my concept of having a bf and my whole concept of love is overrated. He thinks there's nothing wrong with meeting a guy and fooling around. Then again, I know straight people, guys and girls who are the same. I can't live like that. And I don't look down on that at all. It's their life, who am I to judge?

But is that all due to lack of role models? I doubt it. My parents are the best role models anyone can ask for, and I still remember not wanting to be like them. Which for some people might be weird, because they are successful people who are happy. But it might just be the concept of being my own person.

What I really like is Brew's concept he developed in the Mashburn/Foley stories. Kyle knows he's gay, but only gay to Tim. I think that's a very safe concept to work with. Because I feel like I probably could marry a girl and have kids, but I don't want to. Some people do, and I find nothing wrong with that. Some people might, but what others think is irrelevant to what you think. No one can possibly truly understand someone's point of view.

I know I may have contradicted myself once or twice in this, but meh. I felt like it was something I should say. Role models may be good, but I grew up great without one. The only advice I took from my parents was, "Make whatever choice you want. But be sure to live up to the consequences as well." All through my life I think I based my decisions on that.

I know I bring a lot into the topic, some which is irrelevant, but that's what you get from someone like me^^ I'm not the best at organizing my thoughts onto paper. Blame it on my choice of profession.

cheerz

Ry^!

[blue]

:D :smt006 Hey! Glad you could drop in, Ryan. Great to hear from you again.

Responding to a couple of Ryan's points:

Ryan was speaking to teens for at least the first one I'll respond to, so this is speaking mostly to teens, but also to adults.

Should I stay or should I go now?

:?: If you're a teen, you're gay, and you know your parents will kick you out if you come out, what should you do?

* It is alright to be gay. Your feelings are love for another person, who just happens to be the same sex.

* You have nothing to be ashamed of. You are not a sinner or unnatural.

:arrow: Strictly my personal opinion:

If you follow these, it's your best chance for support if you have to move out somewhere along the way.

1. Stay at home for now; stay in the closet a little longer.

2. Find a job. Save your money somewhere no one else can get to it.

3. Find a friend or relative you can really trust for when you need their help, so they can give you a ride or a place to stay, and be there to support you. -- There *are* people who will be there for you!

4. Find a place to stay temporarily, like at a friend's or relative's or even a hotel.

5. Find a place to move to permanently.

6. Study hard and make good grades, as best you can.

7. Wait until you are old enough to live on your own, usually 18.

8. When you can, you will be able to move out and make a life for yourself, even if your parents don't approve.

Now, the really controversial part. Is it OK to stay at home, to hide who you are, and live with your parents until you are 18? -- Yes. In fact, unless you are being abused in some way, as a minor you don't have much option except to stay. At some point, you may feel you can't stand it anymore. Alright, see the plan I listed above. You'll have friends to support you, including in court if need be, to establish your independence. But if you can, stay at home. Is that being dishonest? Hmm. Well, I'd say if you are in danger of being kicked out for something like being gay, then it is better to withhold that for your safety, until you are old enough to live on your own. Then if you have no choice but to move out, or you get kicked out, you have the best chance at a good life.

------

Two Wild and Crazy Guys!

I agree with Ryan. I am not the kind of guy who is going to sleep around with everybody. Having sex has an emotional component, whether people admit it or not. Getting in a relationship is going to have an emotional impact. In other words, when you get dumped or dump someone else, you and they are going to be bummed out. I would rather wait for someone I really want to do those things with. I can wait a little longer for something that good. Until then, well, if I do something alone, it's not hurting anyone, including me. Sure, it would be lots more enjoyable with someone else. So look for someone.

I am not a party animal. I'm not big on crowds or clubs or bars. Sure, I party every now and then. Sure, I drink, but rarely. I don't like being drunk or losing control of myself. That's not fun to me. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy a good time. It means I'm pretty normal, I think. I hope it doesn't make me sound boring or anti-social. I don't think I am, really.

I've heard the argument that the opportunities to find someone, Mr. Right or Ms. Right, are much more rare for gay people, so that justifies hooking up with whoever. Nope.

I can understand the argument that, if you find someone you want to be with, then take the chance. Well, OK, be safe, use protection. I won't rule out the possibility that I might, with someone I really liked. I'm human, I'm honest enough with myself to know that and to find it appealing. It's just, I'd rather know that who I do something that intimate with is really going to like me and I'll really like him.

And for your sake, and his or her sake, make sure if you do something, you and your partner are safe and healthy and use protection. Don't get sick or get hurt just 'cause you got horny and had sex. -- I'd hope you have fun and really enjoy being with whoever it is.

I'm not trying to come down on anyone and say they can't or they shouldn't. It's their life (your life). Just be smart so you can really, really have a great time when you do find someone to be intimate with, or that really special person.

Hey, it worked for Ryan, and it works for others. And that is worth it, and really amazing.

[aj]

I find that people (big surprise here!) move back and forth between being believers in love and doing the random hookup thing.

I remember sitting in a bar, many years ago, talking to an older gay guy and trying very hard to understand why he wouldn't want a love relationship with another man. I wasn't equipped with the experience to see his point about liking his independence and just wanting to have fun.

About a year ago, i found myself explaining the exact same point of view that the older man had tried to convey to me in the bar, to a younger friend--with as little success as the man in the bar had with me, i might add.

But between the time in the bar and the night i tried to explain it to my young friend, I'd had a relationship with a wonderful man who is still my best friend, and another relationship with a sociopath who I wouldn't piss on if he was on fire. And several smaller affairs in between. So I've been down that path, and i thought i was over it: I had my friends that i saw on a fairly regular basis, and i had my very dear friends who i live with, and my life felt fairly complete. I was content.

Then i got a very strange letter in the mail, and all of a sudden I became a believer in true love again.

Life is more peculiar and unpredictable than any of us can stand, so we try to establish rules and norms, and none of them are true.

cheers,

aj