A question of flaunting

"Until same-sex marriage is legal everywhere and same-sex couples are allowed the rights as every heterosexual couple worldwide, we simply do not think it's fair or just for a female bride-to-be to celebrate her upcoming nuptials here at Cocktail. We are entitled to an opinion, this is ours."

This article is making the rounds on the gay blogosphere, so I wanted to see what QC.com readers thought of it (the discussion at JMG is interesting):

The women come to celebrate without having to worry about straight men pawing them. The gay men are there because, well, they don't want to be around a lot of women.

For years, some bar owners have tried to accommodate both groups, but that's becoming increasingly difficult. With California's vote last November in favor of the gay-marriage ban known as Proposition 8, some gays are saying that bachelorette parties at their bars are becoming more than a minor nuisance. They're a constant reminder that gays don't have equal marriage rights.

"The women are a hoot, and some can be just delightful," said Geno Zaharakis, the owner of Cocktail, a gay bar on North Halsted Street. "But because not everybody can get married, watching them celebrate, it's such a slap in the face. Prop 8 just reopened the wound."

Zaharakis told me that Cocktail stopped hosting bachelorette parties a couple of years ago when he noticed his gay patrons weren't just complaining about the women being minor irritants but about them "flaunting" their right to marry. So Zaharakis hung a sign on the front door of his establishment that says, "Bachelorette Parties Are Not Allowed."

I'd be curious to know what your take on it.

As a side note, I call it "homo-tourism" with my straight friends -- taking the girls to the gay bar. That's just one the many words I bring to the table. :-)

Declining or Transitioning?

Thanks to @harveymilk for the heads up.

An interesting article from the journal AIDS Care that uses the changes in the gay community over the past 20 years as a way of talking about HIV prevention. 

In dry terms: 

This study sought to identify how urban gay communities are undergoing structural change, reasons for that change, and implications for HIV prevention planning. Key informants (N=29) at the AIDS Impact Conference from 17 cities in 14 countries completed surveys and participated in a facilitated structured dialog about how gay communities are changing. In all cities, the virtual gay community was identified as now larger than the offline physical community. Most cities identified that while the gay population in their cities appeared stable or growing, the gay community appeared in decline. Measures included greater integration of heterosexuals into historically gay-identified neighborhoods and movement of gay persons into suburbs, decreased number of gay bars and clubs, less attendance at gay events, less volunteerism in gay or AIDS organizations and overall identification and visibility as a gay community. Participants attributed structural change to multiple factors including gay neighborhood gentrification, achievement of civil rights, less discrimination, a vibrant virtual community and changes in drug use. Consistent with social assimilation, across cities, gay infrastructure, visibility and community identification appears to be decreasing. HIV prevention planning, interventions, treatment services, and policies need to be re-conceptualized for MSM in post-gay communities. Four recommendations for future HIV prevention and research are detailed.

There are two interesting take-aways from the article:

1) The existing gay communities and organizations are changing, and no one is quite sure where it's going, or if it's for good or for evil.

2) HIV/STI prevention in gay men is becoming more difficult due to these changes.

Anyone who works in the LGBT community or in AIDS prevention will say, in response: no duh. But it's nice that we have the research to prove what we've been saying for years. :-) 

Speaking of Drag Queens

Let's talk about RuPaul :-). (Thanks to BigLugLand for this one, via Twitter.)

While my positive experience as a gay teenager is not a universal one, by any means, it's one that's becoming more and more common. In the 1970s, the average coming-out age was 21; in 2007, it was closer to 13. Gay teens are coming out earlier to increasingly accepting parents, and the cocoon-to-butterfly narrative that has shaped much of gay culture -- and drag in particular -- is no longer as universal. For many men of my generation, coming out registered on the personal trauma scale somewhere between our first pimple and the pain of our first breakup.

Which is somewhat at odds with the message of the drag queen. A drag queen is sassy, glittery and fabulous -- "a punk rock reaction to our masculine culture," as RuPaul told me, when I spoke to her over the phone. Drag is a way of taking what has often been held against gay men -- our effeminacy, our outspokenness, our passion for ABBA -- and celebrating it with style. Drag queens imitate women like Judy Garland, Dolly Parton and Cher because they overcame insult and hardship on their path to success, and because their narratives mirror the pain that many gay men suffer on their way out of the closet. These women didn't become drag icons because they had a mildly awkward sex talk with their parents.

According to Lady Bunny, the founder of New York's now-defunct Wigstock Festival, drag faded from pop culture at the end of the '90s because "people got used to the idea of the drag queen." Mainstream audiences -- and gay audiences -- simply stopped being shocked by the idea of a man dressed as a woman. "We've had an entire generation grow up seeing drag queens play basketball on daytime talk shows," she says, "and I don't think it's that freeing for gay people anymore."

It also raises a bigger question: Without the trauma of oppression, how will future generations of gay men define themselves? Through promiscuity? Party drugs? A flair for dinner parties? "With more and more teenagers coming out of the closet earlier, and parents being more supportive, the whole dynamic has changed," says Sean Mullens, the director of "Filthy Gorgeous: The Trannyshack Story." "The explosive party scene doesn't really have a place anymore."

I thought this was an excellent and well written piece on the state of gay culture, especially the role of drag queens within it. It's funny because, when I first started doing drag, I remember an older friend of mine saying, "I just don't like it, but I'm from an age where you shouldn't do anything so openly gay." And then, of couse, there's the endless stigma of men my age who won't sleep with a drag queen because now we're obsessed with straight men.

And so it goes, all this gender stuff.

Regardless, I went to a drag show (by myself) last night. After all these years, I posited drunkenly on Twitter, I will say this: a drag show still makes me smile.

So theorize it all you want, I still fucking love them.

Oh, and an interesting little bit praising drag queens when I did a google search, "researching the topic," for "drag and gay culture.

LGBT HISTORY: Queers Read This/I Hate Straights

This is probably one of those moving pieces I have ever read. It moved me to call myself queer. I cry everytime I read it for its beauty and anger. It was originally printed in 1990 and has recently found itself a nice little rebirth here on the 'net.

Don't be angry, heterosexuals. It's like the black panther party... it's here for us :-).

How can I tell you. How can I convince you, brother,sister that your life is in danger: That everyday you wake up alive, relatively happy, and a functioning human being, you are committing a rebellious act. You as an alive andfunctioning queer are a revolutionary.

There is nothing on this planet that validates, protectsor encourages your existence. It is a miracle you are standing here reading these words. You should by all rights be dead. Don't be fooled, straight people own the world andthe only reason you have been spared is you're smart, lucky or a fighter.

Straight people have a privilege that allows them to do whatever they please and fuck without fear. But not only do they live a life free of fear; they flaunt their freedom inmy face. Their images are on my TV, in the magazine I bought, in the restaurant I want to eat in, and on thestreet where I live. I want there to be a moratorium onstraight marriage, on babies, on public displays ofaffection among the opposite sex and media images that promote heterosexuality. Until I can enjoy the same freedomof movement and sexuality, as straights, their privilegemust stop and it must be given over to me and my queer sisters and brothers. Straight people will not do this voluntarily and so they must be forced into it. Straights must be frightened into it. Terrorized into it. Fear is the most powerful motivation. No one will give us what wedeserve. Rights are not given they are taken, by force ifnecessary. It is easier to fight when you know who your enemy is. Straight people are your enemy. They are your enemy
when they don't acknowledge your invisibility andcontinue to live in and contribute to a culture that killsy ou. Every day one of us is taken by the enemy. Whether it's an AIDS death due to homophobic government inaction or a lesbian bashing in an all-night diner (in a supposedly lesbian neighborhood).

AN ARMY OF LOVERS CANNOT LOSE

Being queer is not about a right to privacy; it is about the reedom to be public, to just be who we are. It means everyday fighting oppression; homophobia, racism, misogyny,the bigotry of religious hypocrites and our own self-hatred.(We have been carefully taught to hate ourselves.) And now of course it means fighting a virus as well, and all those homo-haters who are using AIDS to wipe us off the face ofthe earth. Being queer means leading a different sort of life. It's not about the mainstream, profit-margins,patriotism, patriarchy or being assimilated. It's not about executive directors, privilege and elitism. It's about being on the margins, defining ourselves; it's about gender-fuck and secrets, what's beneath the belt and deep insidethe heart; it's about the night. Being queer is "grassroots" because we know that everyone of us, every body,every cunt, every heart and ass and dick is a world ofpleasure waiting to be explored. Everyone of us is a world of infinite possibility. We are an army because we have to be. We are an army because we are so powerful. (We have so much to fight for; we are the most precious of endangered species.) And we are an army of lovers because it is we whoknow what love is. Desire and lust, too. We invented them.We come out of the closet, face the rejection of society,face firing squads, just to love each other! Every time we fuck, we win. We must fight for ourselves (no one else isgoing to do it) and if in that process we bring greater freedom to the world at large then great. (We've given somuch to that world: democracy, all the arts, the concepts of love, philosophy and the soul, to name just a few giftsfrom our ancient Greek Dykes, Fags.) Let's make every spacea Lesbian and Gay space. Every street a part of our sexual geography. A city of yearning and then total satisfaction.A city and a country where we can be safe and free and more.We must look at our lives and see what's best in them, seewhat is queer and what is straight and let that straight chaff fall away! Remember there is so, so little time. And I want to be a lover of each and every one of you. Next year, we march naked.

The full text is here, and a great analysis of it as a manifesto can be found on this now defunct blog.

GAY STUFF: Gay for Pay

Shhhh... I have a secret for all those people watching the "str8" men who have sex with men on Xtube or on other websites...

If they are voluntarily having sex with men, even as the giver, they aren't exactly straight anymore.

Teehee. Oh boy.

GAY STUFF: Beyond Masculinity

Thought I'd share what I'm reading right now. Many thanks to Trevor Hoppe for A) telling everyone about this amazing project, and B) editing the thing. It truly is amazing.

Beyond Masculinity: Essays by Queer Men on Gender and Politics (img from the same website)

GAY STUFF: Trans-identity

My dear friend LH the other day was drunk and waxing poetic on the idea of trans-identity. She posits that most transgendered individuals, and, by extension, most transsexuals are not real. She has extensive history with trans-identified persons; I would call her a bit of an expert, at least from a FTM perspective.

But the idea got me thinking. There are a couple of things that, perhaps, I have been uncomfortable saying or stating publically due to my attempted belief that people are just people and we should leave them at that. It is the right of the individual to decide, exactly, what their own identity is and how they choose to express it. It's not my place to judge, right???

Except there seems to be a lot of transidentified persons in the world who are not actively seeking a "solution" to it.

There are a couple of things that strike me:

1) First of all, it bothers me that "Gender Identity Dysphoria" is the only "psychological illness" (per the DSM-IV) that is "cured" by a physical surgery. In order to be approved for that surgery, in fact, you have to have a psychiatrist diagnose you with GID. That's troublesome -- though I understand there are other mental problems that have biological bases, and I would not be surprised if there are surgeries in the future to deal with autism, depression, and a multitude of other mental illnesses.

2) Second of all, trans-identity is just that ... an identity. Who cares??? The fact that people can now come out as trans is indicative of a mood shift even within the culture as a whole for gender dysphoria, as there is a burgeoning community to support the identity. (LH argues that if you would not have gone through the surgery in the 1950s then you are not truly trans.)

3) Is surgery really necessary for an identity or for the continuation of identification??? Probably not. Would there be a surgery to make me more justifiably gay??? (I can't imagine that would be, although the rash of drag queens altering their bodies to perform better as female fascinates me, as is it truly dragif you have teh body of the opposite gender??? But it is all about performance of gender...)

4) This blog apparently requires lots of quotation marks and question marks and ellipses.

5) Is the creation of the trans-community merely an extension of discomforts around alternative gender performance ... a separation from the traditional, for example, butch/femme dichotomy of lesbians? And, in the world of gay men, the drag queens embracing their feminity but unable to understand themselves as a super-effeminant man within a culture that accepts only heterosexuality as the pinnacle of homosexual desire.

6) The sexualization of alternate gender performance... hm. Fetishization, more specifically.

I believe the fifth point is most salient to the discussion, as the role of gender within a community of sexual minorities is one that is becoming louder and louder in public discourse. I have been labelled, in the past, as "same gendered loving" because there are attractions to male-identified biological females (I know one of them is probably reading this blog these days). The label was placed on me because I seem to date (and be attracted to) more masculine presenting persons, while presenting as more effeminant, more "gay," myself. However, I do not present as female, I still ultimately present as a male, a gay male. So I am attracted to my same gender, but not my same sex. But that does not diminish my homosexuality.

But, again, the question comes down to that gender question -- I am not "str8 acting" or "masc" as they post on the "dot com" (gay.com) or on craigslist. I can't even fool myself anymore.

A dear friend of mine from college has recently come out as "non-male, non-female." He does not identify as trans, but, rather, he identifies outside of gender... gender neutral, perahps, but performs publically as male. What does that mean? He has no desire to alter his sex, but he knows that his sex-gender ratio is not 1-1. Is there pressure for him to actively identify as trans? Or, does he now fall into this somewhat unusual terminology that has sprung up "genderqueer" -- that is, a rejection of the two gender dichotomy. However, the rhetoric around it seems to create a triad of gender identities -- male, female, and genderqueer. I would rather subscribe to the notion that there is an ongoing spectrum of gender identities, much like we have with our sexualities and a large group of other identities.

But this is of minimal importance to the discussion at hand.

The question remains: is there such thing as trans-identity, or is fake, created out of the ability tocreated and the need to be different, to somehow squeeze oneself into an existing pattern? "It's there, I'm gender dysphoric, therefore that's where I belong."

The question is moot. Because, guess what, it's not my place to judge. Identity is your own, and, if people choose to identify as trans, that's fine... if it really means that they are crying out for some sort of acceptance because their "home community" (gay/lesbian/bi) is now rejecting them based on a more heteronormative approach to gender -- "men act like men" and "women act like women" -- than that's a fault of that communities', not of the individuals that are affected by it.

For me, I identify as genderqueer. I think...

...for now.

Because, in the end, as there is a wide spectrum of gender identities and variants, there is also the possibility for an individuals life to move all over the spectrum throughout their lifespan.

And that, my dears, is the essence of diversity, neh? (Sorry, been reading Shogun)

PS -- And if you choose to sexualixe, fetishize (or de-sexualize, or de-fetishize) me based on my chosen gender, then i have one thing to say: FUCK OFF.

GAY STUFF: Gay Bars Going Extinct?

This is fascinating, also via the Joe. My. God. Blog (Joe, I don't know if you read this blog at all, but I think I secretly want to be you...) -- here's the audio from NPR:

At this point in the recession, or slowdown, or whatever you want to call it, you're probably familiar with the term "business cycle." Business and businesses have life cycles just like everything else. Demand creates new opportunities, and then when that demand dries up businesses die.

Every year, Fortune Magazine releases a list of 10 businesses it thinks are facing extinction. Some of this year's casualties? Record stores, crop dusting and telemarketing. Oh, and gay bars, too. That one caught our eye because gay business in general is booming.

We talked a little while ago about the death of the queer city, the end of the gayborhood, and the fact that the internet is destroying real-life gay culture.

We have talked before about the dying "real life" culture of the queers. We're a side show, somewhere to go every now and again. With the growing acceptance of homosexuality, the need for our own space is disappearing.

This is not the gay life I signed up for.

You know, it's funny, I have not been to a straight bar in a long, long time. In fact, I had one explosive night at Cadillac Ranch downtown and a handful of experiences at places like the Gypsy Hut or the Northside Tavern, but it's just not the same. I like my gay people. I like knowing that when I am in a bar, and I am out and free, that I can be who I want to be and not worry about whether or not I'm in the "right kind of bar."

In fact, this seems to go against the very premise of Small Town Gay Bar.

I wonder, rather, if the development of gay centers is a step towards integration, and if there is a lesson in racial integration. But there are very few international or cultural hubs around the country anymore -- is Chinatown what it used to be? OTR used to be a German center, are there any more European-culture centers anymore? And, if we have an African-American center, it becomes a "ghetto." I want to live within my culture; I don't want to just visit it on the weekends.

I don't know, I don't like it at all. I like my homonormative life.

GAY STUFF: Thank you, Michael Chank

Also, another little tidbit.

Thank you, darling, for being so concise and so wonderful. I was sure I would bitch about this particular subject come June or so, but you beat me to the punch.

I'm tired of being scooped by QCityNews on topics. (I love you, Sam.)

ELECTION 2008: Stupid Republicans

First of all, so so so so happy that McCain -- once near-dead -- is appearing to be the front-runner for the GOP endorsement. Huckabee is terrifying, as he tends to be more conservative than Bush, though his "rough and tumble" style of politics is entertaining and GSD (gets shit done) ... what he gets done, though is bothersome. It reminds me of my own home state's governor, Gov. Sanford, who took two pigs under his arms into the statehouse to protest the pork barrelling of the SC budget. And Romney... well, we thought KERRY was a flip-flopper. Didn't Romney once support abortion and gay rights? Or was that just in Massachusetts? Funny that he will likely not get his own state but will, instead, win Utah soundly makes me laugh.

Secondly, Edwards is out. Thank god. He's pretty, though.

Third, Clinton will win in a landslide in (most of) the 20 states for Super Tuesday. I'm sorry folks, she's hugely far ahead in a lot of those states... 20 points plus in most. I don't care if Obama has a little of momentum after winning two -- yes, only two of six, primaries. Clinton has won four of six, and she still dominates the rest of the field.

Fourth, haven't I always said that a McCain-Giuliani ticket would be the Republican choice? Haven't I also said you can't beat it?

My official predictions for the 2008 election come down to:
Republican ticket: McCain-Giuliani
Democratic ticket: Clinton-????
(I'm trying to limit my choices down to the following for VP: Obama, Richardson, Vilsak, and Bayh... I'm actually leaning towards Richardson, but, the way the primaries are shaking up, I'm thinking Obama as VP is not entirely unbelievable)

Fifth, Bill Clinton had no chance of doing anything right in this election. Leave the man alone. He's trying to help.

FINALLY:

If only the Republicans would get their shit together on gay rights, they would take the vote right from underneath the Democrats. Not joking. And I base it off a quote by Chrissy Nakonski, a transsexual seeking the Republican nom to her state legislative district: "I've voted Republican all my life...Republicans swear by not raising taxes, and raising taxes would hurt families in poverty, like mine." The gay community spends money and, by and large, is becoming increasingly suburban and middle class. Ideologically, I think the gay community is far more Republican and the only reason it's not universally so is that they don't support us. If they just became a little more libertarian, the years and years of "assuming they're with us" the Dems have been playing would be over.

GAY STUFF: "Last Call" Article

I will blog about this later (after having already blogged once about it):

"Last Call" Op/Ed piece from the Boston Globe

Although there is clearly a link there as to why I found this article interesting, notice the point of the "long tail" business. IE: is the marketplace as a physical structure now disappearing??? ARe commercial centers at the end of their life?

GAY STUFF: The Mainstreaming of Gay Culture

Listen Here

(Because I need to take ownership of my own feelings, I will preface this by saying: I hate that I am on the part of the NYU prof who says "queer is the new gay," implicating that there are people that are trying to keep gay as different just because it is and no longer represents a separation from American culture. I have my own fear that, to reference another interviewee, I may be, or want to be, Will in Will & Grace).

I think it's fascinating, the sociological implications of marriage. Tucker Carlson (conservative commentator on CNN Headline News) says he is pro-gay marriage because it's "civilizing." I think we are starting to see that happen here, but it's similar to what I have been saying for a while ... and Penny Tration pointed out the same thing in her blog (here -- go to her blog, there are two articles in a row) based off a Yahoo report about the death of gay ghetto's like WeHo, Boystown, Castro, and the Village (locally, Northside).

Gay is passe. (A sharp division from "gay is good" in previous generations) It's common now, and it's on the forefront of American politics but not in a cutthroat sort of way, more of a "tying up loose ends" sort of way.

Rather than fighting for visibility and recognition and the simple right to be, we are fighting just to make sure that our rights are guaranteed and for marriage -- marriage! The penultimate of heteronormativity. Don't get me wrong, I support the right to marry for anyone ... and, later, the right to divorce. But it's telling of where we are.

The commentator makes the point that gay pride parades are less about drag queens and "extremes" these days, but more about fathers with strollers.

How, unusual. We are no longer counter-culture in most sectors of the world ... we're, mainstream. (I knew the world was falling apart when a marketing firm found out that our "purchasing power" and our "market share" was just under that of the entire African-American population. I wish I could still find that link.)

A long time ago, I read Daniel Harris's The Rise and Fall of Gay Culture and was disgusted, at the time, of the idea that this idealized world that I had heard about -- fabulous clubs, flashy drag queens, counter-cultural movement, sexual liberation -- was falling apart. After all, that's what I wanted. The more I delved, however, the more I found it to be true.

All those wonderful things have given way to a mainstream society with an unspoken "underbelly" upon which all these other things happen. (I will never forget the day a friend of mine said to me in a gay community meeting "We don't talk about sex here, that's not what we're about" -- I don't think he knows I still carry those words with me.) Oh sure, the sexual liberation exists... that is, we can be sexually liberated behind closed doors... just don't talk about it or discuss it, or even mention that we have sex.

It's all very suburban, to my mind.

Are we like everyone else? No, and that's what makes us wonderful. I think I am beginning to understand what the black community went through in the 70s-90s. "Now we have the rights, but we still want to be ourselves." It makes sense to me.

Gay culture, like black culture, was borne out of oppression. It is from oppression springs acitivism (hence, why we don't see ACTUP or Queer Nation anymore).

We are becoming a true part of this American Life... assimilated, mainstream, consumerist, and armchair lobbyists.

I just don't hope we start losing our culture because of it.

Oh, and to the couple on the interview that says "here in suburbia, you can be radical every day." I would like to retort: it takes less courage to simply put a middle-class, suburban, white (not that there's anything wrong with that) face on homosexuality than it did to come out when your life was threatened. Sorry, you aren't no Harvey Milk or Harry Hay.

...and I bet you don't even know who they are.