Sunday, 23 September 2007

So You Think I'm Gay?

The "Gay Scene": To be brief, I just don't like it. I can't figure out why one's sexual orientation would make one act differently (outside the bedroom), but I think it would be either willful denial or blindness to deny that many gay men have adopted certain characteristics that have come to be known as “gay acting.” And I say “adopted” because not all gay men do this, and many that do didn't do it before they came out. Homosexuality may not be a choice, but it appears these characteristics are. I suppose it is these characteristics that enable “gaydar” to work, and maybe that's why they exist: guys are sending out clear “mating signals” to ease dating. And it's nothing against gays, necessarily. I also don't like when receptionists on the west side of Los Angeles adopt fake British accents, or when newly rich people start pretending they like opera, or when the Chinese kids I went to high school with start speaking Ebonics and acting like “thugz.” Give me a break! Why can't people just be who they are? Perhaps my antipathy comes from a lack of understanding why they do it. I'm definitely not saying people shouldn't have the freedom to express themselves how they want. And I'm definitely not ripping on guys who are naturally feminine or who really do have a flair for fashion or who actually do tend to scream when they're excited. But it just annoys me when people fake it, and I'm not looking forward to being lumped together with that, or having my friends and family wondering when I'm going to start lisping and wearing feather boas.

Bogus Hindsight: I've never really liked most team sports. I've always been interested in architecture. I've always gotten along well with girls as friends. I've always been close to my mom. I think it's fun to read celebrity magazines like People. I talk really fast when I get excited. I think these things are just part of who I am. I think I can point to how those characteristics developed. And I don't think they have anything to do with the fact that I find boys attractive. But they could be seen as “gay” traits. And I'm sure people are going to look back and nod smugly and say “ahhh, of course, I should have known!” I just find that ridiculous and annoying. If they look back to the fact that I haven't dated a girl since high school, or that I got caught with naked pictures of myself on my computer in high school, well THOSE were legitimate clues. But I won't enjoy people examining my life and finding “gay” things in my past that are not. I don't want to be re-defined through gay-colored glasses.

Matt's words, not mine. But it feels like me. You could dub me with it, actually. But he had different reasons when he wrote this: "Outing". Me, I just don't feel comfortable with labelling myself gay, bi or straight. I don't feel it presents me with accuracy. And I love accuracy to the bone.

But I do find boys immensely attractive, though. Mostly. Not all the time, but mostly. Why do you even need a label for that?


  1. Oh my! I'm kinda hit by this one! hahaha! When I started to accept the fact that I'm gay (at least to myself) I sort of had this idea of throwing myself at least a little bit in doing gay stuffs like going to bars,doing gay talk,being fashionable etc etc.. in the end I end up like a sordid looser,my gaytalk are mismatched and my taste are well not too gay......basta I'll just be myself na lang,I would loose or gain naman if we dont go with the trend diba?

  2. well, u are been stuck by not disclosing the truth.. well, it's our personal life so we dont have to decide on norms what world follows.. Having numerous friend in girls, speaking fast when excited, being close to mom -- are not gay stuffs.. they are emotional stuffs.. to appreciate these are the people 'who respect emotions and feelings' and they know that abnormal boys have no fucking strongs feelings like what you have - it's a god gift to u babe..

  3. I remember this piece I read once about words. How terribly relative they are off the bat. Like love can be different for people from different countries. Same way as how the word bisexual has become for Filipinos. Or like how marriage for some people (at the back of their heads at least) are mere financial merging and transactional. Anyway I think it's so hard to be accurate really when it comes to labels as insanely paradoxical as it may sound. Because, really, labels are for accuracy right? It's like gossip. It starts with the true meaning/story then as it gets passed on from generation to generation and countries to countries, different connotations get attached. Anyway it's about you really, and what it means to you. You create your own meaning for it. But it still helps to say your gay for posterity's sake. I mean you can't write down in your documents, when you're asked about your sexuality, that you like boys. It's the system of words and politics. I don't know if that made any sense.

  4. onestrangeboy:

    Good points. And yes, labels are indeed like gossip!

    However, why should we even have to write down our "sexuality" on documents? Can we even sum our sexuality in words? Even the concept of "race" is clumsy.

    Those are SOME of the reasons why I don't like calling myself or being called 'gay'. Those and the fact that I still use it to mean 'carefree'. Ehehe.

  5. For statistics, for science, for reasons just like that. In art criticism shades of different hues are often very inaccurate despite having standards already and sometimes, it can even crosses to the next hue in the spectrum. Cerulean can sometime lean on the hue of green or blue. Same as with aquamarine. There will always be a small point difference. Even the real value of gravity varies minutely, depending on how far is the moon (I think, although it could be on where the location of the earth is in its revolution around the sun), but it still does and yet we still stick to the scientific constant whenever it will be factored in a formula. It's not about summing it up. We narrow it down to a smaller chunk in the spectrum. Nothing or, no word, will ever be precise or accurate. But it helps to trim out descriptions with just one word. It makes life less complicated. Unless you want a complicated one of course :)

  6. No word will ever be precise or accurate. But some words are more precise than others. Don't settle for less when better options are available.

    I find 'gay' a very clumsy word - bound to misrepresent rather than embody "people like me".

    I also find the concept of sexual orientation very foreign. I just didn't grow up distinguishing people by their sexual tastes. I'm not about to start now as I believe it isn't even possible!

    I don't mind complexity. I'd take that over inaccuracy anytime!

    You're interesting. Also very nice to converse with. :)