unique visitors since July 27, 2005

« A New Prediction, This Time With Math | Main | My Last Post on This Inanity »

December 15, 2005


Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest)

Very well said, Robbie.


It's odd though that straight women seem to have no problem watching lesbians. I think that the straight guy fear (like the army thing ("I don't want to shower with gay guys"), comes from terror of being objectified by another man, in the same way that they know they objectify women. Deep down American men don't really like women.
So I say, let em squirm:)


I'm picturing some poor fratboy locked up in a clockwork orange rig, forced to watch Bravo's next 'Queer Eye' marathon...



I agree that toleration and acceptance of homosexuality is enough... validation is silly to demand and even sillier to need.

The problem I have with Kaus et al is their need to assert that they aren't just interested but, in fact, "innately averse." It's like their saying, "Every molecule of my being is straight - every fiber. I couldn't possibly be gay in any way because I am innately averse. Not just uninterested but INNATELTY AVERSE! No gay here... not a smidgen." It sounds sort of depserate.

Of course I can't blame these straight men for still playing the "not me, not me, not me" game I wasted the first 20 years of my life desperately playing. But Kaus's loudly professed aversion is just another example of it. And the other half of that same game is the joking and innuendo that subtley tell every child and teenager that gayness is a bad thing. Ridiculing Kaus et al won't change that, of course - but it doesn't hurt for kids to hear that maybe "visceral revulsion" is not okay either...

Craig Ranapia

I've been rather amused by the pile-on over Micky Kaus, who you might not agree with but at least deserves points for being candid.

OTOH, am I the only person who's just a wee bit tired of all the puffery about how "brave" Heath Ledger & Jake Gyllenhaal are for playing gay and incuring the wrath of Bushitler's Reich (aka "Red America" or "Jesusland"), while they're busy crapping on about how uncomfortable shooting the sex scenes made them and asserting their hetero credentials at every turn.

FFS, why don't they just tatoo "I'm straight - really" on their foreheads and be done with it? If nothing else, I'm not psychotic and realise that actors and the characters they play are two different things.

And for the benefit of Citizen Cain et. al., I'm not interested in paying $15 to watch entirely grautitous boob-and-beaver shots or get bored rigid by heterosexual actors grinding away on top of each other. If that floats you boat, go to it - it just bores and (yes) disgusts me on all kinds of levels. And, yes, I'll cop that part of it is social conditioning (pretty buttoned-down and proud of it) and that being gay I just don't find heterosexual intercourse - hardcore or simulated - or female genitalia stimulating. Get over it.


I think Kipp's and Craig's comments are pretty interested when juxtaposed, if only because I wanted to point one thing out.

I have plenty of gay male friends who are very averse to female sexuality, be it lesbian or heterosexual. Not only averse, but vocally so. I'm sure we've all heard it from some of our gay friends, all the talk about fish and whatnot.

I'm not so sure that boasting of one's sexuality is a heterosexual male thing, but simply a male thing. I mean, after all, it seems half the time we gay men talk about nothing else except that we're gay.

So, again, I cut Kaus and others the same slack I'd want for myself.

Queer Conservative

It's hypocritical for the gay community to demand validation from everyone else, when a good portion of that community is part and parcel of a left wing ideology that is one of the most unaccepting groups in American culture.

Craig Ranapia


Fair point. I hope my comment didn't come across as the vapourings of some misogynistic queen. My point, and I didn't make it very well perhaps, is that just because I'm discomforted (for a number of reasons, one of which is my sexual orientation) by explicit hetero-sex it doesn't mean I hate straights or women anymore than Mickey Kaus hates gays because the prospect of explicit gay sex strikes him as a bit queasy making.

And, as far as I'm aware, if Kaus is homophobic he really, really sucks at it. I've never read anything under his byline that is less than 100% supportive of the civil rights and human dignity of gays and lesbians. If I'm wrong, feel free to point me in the right direction.

Anyway, BM is set for release down here in March. I'll go see it because Ang Lee has a good track record of making films for adults. And it would be nice to see if Ledger can break his recent run of bad films. Hell, I'd like to be rememberd for more than being the bloke who got dumped by King Kong's squeeze. :)


i'm not gay but i live in sf so automatically so many of my peers and friends are. it's nice to see a website that is so on the level about homosexuality that doesn't treat it like some excuse to abandon logic and individuality in favor of obnoxious group think. most homosexuals i know think along these lines. it's too bad so many loudmouths have to turn the whole thing into a clown show making it difficult for your average homosexual who isn't defined by his genital meanderings but by everything else about a person's character namely -- ALMOST EVERYTHING ELSE to go about their business. basically -- yeah! right on! sweet! dude. i'll forward your link on to all my homo pals.


Once again, you make an excellent point and at the same time make me spit-take my beer. I haven't seen the movie yet, but when I do, I'll be thinking of "pork and beans". Thanks so much.


I don't disagree with anything in your post. Personally, I couldn't care less who is homophobic or who isn't. I too get tired of all the things you mention in your post that gay people whine about.
HOWEVER - Anyone who is "repulsed" by two men kissing, or two women kissing or a man and a woman kissing is an UNDERDEVELOPED neanderthal. You have no reason, in the world we live in not to have gotten over the initial shock by now. I can completely agree that you wouldn't seek out seeing it, but if you go too far out of your way not to see it... there's something there as well. And NO I don't consider "fisting" on par with "kissing". I don't buy into the "we all have our preferences" stuff. If you take that logic, then my Aunt Trudy, who is insanely afraid of raisins could be classified as normal. She just has a preference not to see raisins in any food and is completely justified in screaming hysterically at the sight of a raisin. She isn't justified... she's a little nuts. Now if she had seen a TURD in her salad, then I'd say she is justified to run screaming. But just a raisin? That's some deeper seeded shit of some sort. Running away at the sight of a raisin and/or kissing = some kind of inner lunacy/unresolved issues. Running away at sight of turd in food/someone buried to the elbow in ass = perfectly normal response.
And yeah, I know I'm being judgemental toward fisters. Oh well. No harm intended :)


Uh oh, where's Downtown Lad to leap all over a hetero's use of the word "homosexual"?


According to Tony's logic, gay men kissing is a raisin and and gay men fisting is a turd. I'd like to see his entire scale between raisin and turd for gay sex and the yuck factor associated with each.


I'm still wondering how they get the fist...up there...

And strangely, despite my own leanings, I found that to be a well-written post that had me nodding in agreement a couple of times.

Queer Conservative

I cannot watch lesbian porn. But straight porn with a hot guy? I'm there!

Queer Conservative

Tony, sometimes a raisin is just a raisin.


I am just as intrigued by a gay man being "totally grossed-out" by female sex as I am by Kaus' feelings. Boredome and or disinterest is one thing - but visceral disgust is a powerful emotion and I wonder about that power source.

I agree that boasting is a male trait regardless of orientation - but in my case, the boasting is not as interesting as the boasted-about - namely that "visceral aversion." I think another trait men share (women are not so strictly conceptualized, imo) is the need to be "authentic" in their sexuality. If the delineations of our sexual responses are driven by innate, deep-seated apetites and aversions, then our sexuality is a "true" reflection of us - not some interaction or, worse yet, some concession to the world around us. Visceral aversions suggest deep-set, static features of our soul - and that makes everybody feel more secure I suppose.

I'm just as much of a sexuality-dichotomist (at least for male sexuality) as the next guy. I'm gay - but visceral aversions to lesbian or hetero sex confuse me. Women don't interest me sexually - but why would I be "disgusted" by the vision of them being sexual? Why does Kaus say (and feel) that he is innately averse to seeing male-male intimacy? Why get so worked-up over what shouldn't interest you at all? I don't know the answer to that question - but it is worth asking ourselves rather than just cutting eachother slack.


We'll know that America has mellowed out about the gay issue when a movie like Brokeback Mountain doesn't launch a zillion columns like this one or the others it cites. Folks, repeat after me:

It's Only A Movie
It's Only A Movie
It's Only A Movie ...


For a group marginalised for quite some time (although rapidly emerging), the fact that "It's only a movie" is something in itself. That BM generates this kind of response (as with most art) is to be expected and, in my opinion, encouraged.


But I think it's also that they are trying to, as you said: inure.

Now lets get started with some heterosexual inuring.

I know you're trying to cut heterosexual men some slack, because the poor boys have to stand yet another gay movie (first Troy, then Alexander and now this?!?!?) but really...I think they can handle it. I bet they can even handle a little teasing and ridicule because of it.

Don't worry, babe, they're tougher than they look.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Reconstruction in progress, now with 70% less Ben Wade!
RSS Feed
Add to My FeedBurner
Subscribe with Bloglines

"We really love your blog"

"I love reading you ... very entertaining!"
--Dan Savage

"Definition of Pathetic"
--Gay Orbit

"You can write, pal."

"[crickets chirping]"

"Love the Blog. Robbie is BRILLIANT and Malcontent is ok, too."

"You are too smart a person to be leaving one-note bitchy insults on the blogs of 22-year-olds."

"Fun, informative and fresh."
--Rod 2.0


"Love your site."
--A Atom Bomb

"Cool blog!"
--Made in Brazil

Who's Linking to Me?

Creative Commons License