A Failure of Upbringing

Haven't we all been told, time and time again, that gay people are people too? We've heard that they are just like us, which if true, means that there is no "us" and "them" (...and after all we're only ordinary men...) but "us" alone?

Well, it turns out that's simply not true. It would seem that gays, like anti-gays, are perfectly happy to make their difference a basis for remaining outside the mainstream.

For one thing, if sex advice columns written by gay men are any indication, gay men, at least, are sexual fiends. They apparently do it all the damn time, and in any number of new and crunchy ways. Woo hoo for you, fella. But don't try to tell me that we're living the same life, because I can't take 30 minutes a day and devote it to lubey-preparation. Sorry. And, anyway, isn't this exactly what Republicans hate about you? What are you, working for the prosecution now? Perhaps Jews should carry around moneybags with $$ on the side; or all unmarried black mothers should drive Cadillacs and wave welfare checks? Of course not. But fags appear to be actively trying to make an accusation into a reality!

Now, there are some similarities between gay sexual performance and, say the kinds of things straight teenagers are wont to do in public. For example, there was a gay couple on the el a few days ago--and not teenagers--and they were quite demonstrative of their lust. On the train. At rush hour. In a packed car, in front of everyone else. There was no escaping it.

But of course, they wanted to be observed and probably also wanted our disapproval, because that is "hot." Maybe to them. As with teenagers, though, the response is the same: "get a goddamn room!" All of the people on the train were being used, by the gay couple, as fodder for their fantasies about forbidden love. In reality, most people just don't want to see any two people, regardless of gender, going at it in front of their faces. But for gay men to miss the political significance--and consequences--of their "outraaaaaageous!" behavior befuddles me.

The point, and it's not so much devastating but merely true, is that unlike most people who identify themselves through a host of traits and practices, to say nothing of beliefs, homosexual men seem to identify first and foremost with their dicks and where their dicks can go. I am basing this broad generalization on what the self-appointed spokesmen for gay men have publicly said. I am not privy to the inner workings of the culture; I don't doubt the utter humanity of gays, just their public personae and reliance on sexuality alone as a marker.

This is bad. Bad because it's precisely what conservatives have been condemning gay men for identifying with, but somehow gay men can't stop talking about and acting out--in larger-than-life caricature--their sex lives. But bad, also, because it's alienating to liberals who don't understand the need for such consistently obnoxious self-representation.

An example of popular perpetuation of the public image is to be found on message boards across the internets. Find a liberal blog, read the comments, and you will find numerous posts by ostensibly gay men that deal with blatantly inappropriate topics. Say, for example, that someone has posted a brief comment on a movie. You will find responses ranging from "I think the star of the movie is super hott!" (always with the two "t's") to "I didn't pay attention to the film because I was too busy staring at that guy's bulging package!" Another example is a recent post about the NCAA tournament and many of the comments were along the lines of "I turn off the lights and jerk off thinking about sweaty, teenage athletes! I wish they went back to wearing those tight little shorts!" These are amalgams of many, many comments. These are not flukes, or outliers. They are everyday sorts of offhand remarks. And they add up to something more.

Flip those comments around right quick and you'll realize that if someone wrote that they like women's soccer because the bitches have tight asses, or that they see movies to stare at the females' tits, we would rightly rebuke them for being shallow, oversexed twats.

Why should we tolerate this overemphasis on sex, and overly crude and shallow representations of it, from gay men? If everything ultimately boils down to a question of "what do you think it would be like to fuck that guy?" then why do we care about gays at all?

The trap, it seems to me, is inescapable. Gays have claimed their sexuality as their avatar, and unfortunately so have their enemies. Neither side is palatable; both are disgusting in their use of sexuality as the legitimation of their actions. Have gays become so one-dimensional? Or do they just need new spokemen, new branding, less "show me your dick" out-n-proud obnoxiousness?

Or is it me?