Of course they weren't into it, or if they were, they simply had been mentally raped enough by the ruling classes to think that they were enjoying it, when they were forced to fuck one.

[Glice]

You're such a suidaphobe.

[quote=Nefeli]i just, sometimes, find that it is a sad dead end that we have to label everything that way.
i understand, we need words to describe our sexual preferences when we are asked and that the labeling and isolation is from needed to convenient.
as far as i m aware, the straight term is also stereotyped and has a negative meaning regarding especially a man's, limited, mainstream way of thinking and certain social behaviour.
there has always been men who retained? their male apperiance/behaviour, but of course i cant know the % of those who did that because they had to keep their homosexuality hidden. i dont see androphilia as bad, it could bring some balance in people's way of thinking for one, but will it end up being another social situation with elements of isolation and stereotypes?

and a question.
im a woman, but lets say i m a man, straight man and i like to paint men's thighs in a tom of finland kind of way. would my art be considered gay and me aswell and why should it?[/quote]


haha. I love you.

An Observation on Two Essentialisms

Mon 10:42pm
It is a rare thing when the very same gay males who oppose the slightest acknowledgment of gender essentialism do not also embrace and hold dear a number of essentialist ideas about homosexual males. How can it be that males and females may not generally be described as having certain tendencies, behaviors and aptitudes, but homosexual males are somehow naturally more "artistic," "cultured," "stylish," or "witty?" It is easy to catch someone who faithfully asserts that males and females are essentially the same offhandedly according gays with any number of natural "gifts" which make them, as a group, special or even superior. These two positions are obviously irreconcilable, and this commonplace is one of numerous ways that gays reveal their "culture" to be fundamentally little more than a "self esteem" movement.


The above is a brilliant observation by Jack Malebranche which sparked an interesting chat online with him and some other dudes. Any comments/thoughts are much appreciated.

[Glice]

I was wondering the other day about how gay culture is a study in cultural identity - black or jews or women have always been a cultural category, but gays (as a cultural category, can't emphasise that enough) are a relatively recent phenomenon. Like any recently-awakened 'pride' movement, the gays have to be afforded a little bit of slack for defence mechanisms. The problem is where that line between defense-mechanism and enforced alienation is drawn. I can't help but feel that gay becomes an article of faith for a lot of misled sorts. One of the major troubles of 'the gay' is that a gay isn't a gay in every situation - if you're black or a woman, it's near-impossible to avoid that alienation, but there are plenty of gays who live 'two' lives (or, less dismissively, live one life with different facets).

A gay in a gay club is bound to act differently to how s/he does in their daytime life. I think you have to be very careful about drawing the sort of conclusions drawn above - gays in gay clubs aren't a militant, pro-active political organism, they're a bunch of people having a laugh. Of course they're bound to say that gays are great in that context, but are they saying it in front of the houses of parliament? No, they're really not.

This post is a bit drifting, sorry.

Yes they are, otherswise why would you have a march that passes through Whitehall every year? It's called 'GAY PRIDE', not 'IM FINE WITH HOW NATURE MADE ME, NEITHER ASHAMED NOR PROUD'. Also, I have more than enough experience to testify that many, many gays in clubs/pubs don't just have a laugh, often they carry a secret code of conduct which unfolds the more you talk to them and listen. Of course there are aspects of camp culture that I enjoy and embrace, but not when they seem to be the sole point to your advantage.

[Glice]

Surely the codificatoin of social practises occurs as much with a collection of Estate Agents as it does 'the gays'? What is the collective noun for estate agents?

The one that prevents them from dressing in rainbow colours and drives them to march on top of homeless people?

[Glice]

You promised you'd keep my secret shame away from the internet. How dare you. How will I show my face in Wales now?

[MellySingsDoom]

Originally Posted by Glice

What is the collective noun for estate agents?

"Cunts". You may thank me now, later, or never. Spiffing question anyway, what what?

Back on topic - the gay "identity" thing is a sure interesting one...I recall that when I first came out, it seemed important for me to let everyone know of my, uh, gayness, which said a lot about my-then utter insecurity about the whole thing. Sure, being homosexual/"bisexual"/whatever is an important part of my life, but that's it, simply a part. These days, I find the whole "gayer than thou" thing that afflicts not a few peeps in the 'scene here in London tiresome as fuck. I'm tired of cock-talk and bitchy one-upmanship (hello Comptons...). Ultimately, I'd rather be known as an OK/decent human being who happens to be gay etc, rather than a gay who happens to be OK.

Originally Posted by MellySingsDoom

"Cunts". You may thank me now, later, or never. Spiffing question anyway, what what?

Back on topic - the gay "identity" thing is a sure interesting one...I recall that when I first came out, it seemed important for me to let everyone know of my, uh, gayness, which said a lot about my-then utter insecurity about the whole thing. Sure, being homosexual/"bisexual"/whatever is an important part of my life, but that's it, simply a part. These days, I find the whole "gayer than thou" thing that afflicts not a few peeps in the 'scene here in London tiresome as fuck. I'm tired of cock-talk and bitchy one-upmanship (hello Comptons...). Ultimately, I'd rather be known as an OK/decent human being who happens to be gay etc, rather than a gay who happens to be OK.

I finally feel LIBERATED! I'm now ready to log off, go out, and start walking over the homeless with a smile on my face.

[MellySingsDoom]

^^^Hooray!

 

[pbradley]

We've been discussing the Symposium for the past week and a half in my Plato class. What should be said about otherness of love? Malebranche (fitting name) seems to deny the necessity of masculine/feminine dynamics but does he reject that otherness is at all necessary for love? Does he even consider love, or this just about sexual desire?

Originally Posted by pbradley

We've been discussing the Symposium for the past week and a half in my Plato class. What should be said about otherness of love? Malebranche (fitting name) seems to deny the necessity of masculine/feminine dynamics but does he reject that otherness is at all necessary for love? Does he even consider love, or this just about sexual desire?

I'm not sure what you mean. Have you read the book?

[Glice]

Ask Lacan. Which other are you talking about?

[Glice]

Actually, on second thoughts, it strikes me that he's rejecting the 'other' of enforced alienation in the social in favour of a (presumably supressed) predicate of a more Platonic other. Again, ask Lacan.

[pbradley]

Originally Posted by sarramkrop

I'm not sure what you mean. Have you read the book?

No, just your summery. I suppose I'm really just positing the question rhetoically. I have been interested in reading this for myself.

[pbradley]

Originally Posted by Glice

Ask Lacan.

I think I'll read Malebranche first. See if I can do the work myself.