Boys and Girls

[awediot]

One thing most of us share is the discrimination of 'normal' society, and the misguided, equal condemnation of it's God. He makes no distinction between the sexes. Doesn't He? Certainly society does.

As long as you women fall into the "lipstick" category, you are not only accepted, but HOT- (as a shallow, sexual fantasy anyway). You are depicted in mainstream men's magazines and referenced on TV all the time. I can see this as just a demeaning, lustful result of straight men's power, but do you view this as progress at all? Is the increased visibility helpful or does it just increase harmful stereotypes?

Though the struggle for acceptance and self-worth is a deep bond, culturally, and practically, gay men and women couldn't be further apart. You like tools and horses we like drapes and canapés.;) Mutual non-preference makes strange bedfellows, and discrimination, while a sad thing to share in, takes on quite different forms. This topic is not often discussed between us and I am curious about different peoples perspective.

Why is there no guy on guy action in Playgirl? Does the difference make its way into the church?

I know this is a pretty unfocused thread, but anyone have a good tangent?:confused:

[Jennifer5]

I'm not fully sure how to respond, but here's what I've got.

I think part of the reason you don't see that type of thing is because, first of all the people who look at those magizines... probably never suggested it. If they did, in that situation, who knows what would happen. But also the fact that it takes such a long time for our world, or even our country... to really change. I think so many people are so caught up in what they were told by family/society anyone, that they never stop to think for themselves... and when it comes down to it they probably don't even think about it.

[RKate]

I'm not sure what your question is exactly. When you say "does the difference make its way into the church" do you mean gay men verses lesbians and how we are treated in our church communities?

I can speak only for the parish I belong to, that gay couples and lesbian couples seem to be treated very much the same (and very much like heterosexual couples). I've borrowed power tools from gay men and I've cooked meals for the AIDS hospice with lesbians (and gay men and straight men and straight women). Perhaps were our strength is that we don't rely on stereotypes but rather on what people's gifts are, which are of course all over the board.

As for the visibilty question...I'm really not sure. I guess I don't see lesbians being referenced that much on TV, but I also don't watch much TV. I think most thinking people realize that television relies on stereotypes and archetypes for the most part. I never believed that "Friends" was an accurate portrayal of young adults living in New York City any more than I think "The L Word" is representative of the lesbian community in LA. I suppose if things are at least being referenced that the stereotypes can be confronted.

[tdogg]

I don't think the difference lies in whether lesbians like power tools or gay men like to decorate - rather, I think it lies in the fact that those lesbians we know who like power tools and those gay men we know who like to decorate are okay with their personal preferences (including their sexuality). I know straight women who like power tools and are open about it, and likewise straight men who enjoy decorating and are open to it, who are also okay with their personal preferences (not necessarily speaking of sexual here).

The difference lies when any of us are not okay with our personal preferences (i.e., straight women who like power tools but afraid to admit it, etc.). Those who hide who they really are and what they are about, that helps promote these stereotypes. For us who live in the real (and gay) world and understand the individuality of ourselves and others don't bag people into groups depending on their personal preferences, who they like, etc. We tend to take people on an individual basis. Does this make sense? (It's been a longggggggggg day.) :confused:

[Mia14]

awediot, I have actually had this thought myself, that I have very little in common with most of the gay men I know besides the fact that we are all homosexual.

As far as stereotypes go, with lipsticks and tools, I think they're kind of funny. In some people, they're completely correct - like one lesbian friend I have who does indeed play softball, play guitar, work with a fencing company during the summer (doing installation, not as a secretary), drive a Jeep, and some other things that would be stereotypical of a lesbian. In other people, they could be completely innacurate. I know one gay man who joined the military (shhhhh...), loves guns and rifle ranges, has no sense of color-coordination, and only wears combat boots.

As far as why there's no guy-on-guy action in playgirl, I tend to agree with you about how the genders are separated in society, even in homosexuality. *Forgive me for generalizing, but I'll say it.* Many straight guys dream of coming home to find their wives in bed with another woman, but the reverse is not true for most straight women. I think it could partially be from the whole archaic societal view that being male is more desireable, so it is more acceptable for a woman to want to act like someone superior - namely a man. The reverse here is true for gay men - as it is less desireable to be a woman, so it is less acceptable for men to want to be women.

Anyone else on these topics?

[Zerbie]

Awediot - your thread really speaks to me. But there is so much here, I think we probably ought to have started 2 or 3 different ones to get at what's inside it!

I hear ya I hear ya I hear ya!

The boy/girl difference - who do we identify with? This question. . .!

As a bi person, let me just tell ya - more confusing to me than my (lack of) orientation, my sense of social identification. Perhaps it was the way I grew up? In the theater. Since I was 10 years old, gay guys were a known quantity. They were my teachers, choreographers, costumers, fellow-actors, directors, my grown up colleagues who took me under their many and varied wings. They were also the boys I was hangin' out with who were my own age, tho technically none of us knew they were gay until college. They were my mentors, and they were my best friends.

But lesbians - lesbians were a mystery! One of the great mysteries of my life! I was told they did not exist. But then why was there a word for them? Seeing as how my only sexual attractions were for women (for a very long time), what was I??

Arrived at college and immediately heard the talk that the campus was "ruled by lesbians." What did that mean? Who were they? Some girls in my dorm warned me against C dining hall, saying "that's the lesbian dining hall, don't go there." So as soon as I could ditch those girls, I bee-lined for C dining hall and sat there looking around with desperate curiosity hoping I might locate the elusive lesbians who were supposedly so dominant on campus, above all in C dining hall. Okay, I started going to C dining hall 3 times a day, sitting by myself, hoping the lesbians would find me. No, I never met anyone at the dining hall. :rolleyes:

So then, I started reading fliers about the "feminist" speakers and "radical feminist seminars" and decided that was where I had to go. So I went to go hear one of the deans of the college give a talk. Something about how lesbians needed to gain visibility and power. She went on to denigrate ALL men, just for being male they were part of a male hegemony that needed to be defeated. She wanted to remove gay men from gay rights - ahem - lesbian rights movements, because they were "part of the problem." And went on to demean them just as well as any extremist nut-job could.

I sat alone in the back row watching as the room full of young wimmin rose to their feet and applauded her vitriol. Stomach sick, heartbroken, I slipped out early. I had finally found "lesbians" and was disappointed. That moment imprinted on my mind as being what lesbians were all about, and I walked home in the dark alone with tears in my eyes wondering *what I was.* If lesbians hate men for being men, I must be straight. But if I'm sexually attracted to girls but I'm not a lesbian, what am I? :( :confused:

There is a lesbian comic I've seen on TV (forget her name) who summed up beautifully my own past confusion. She is very femme, felt that she did not fit the "lesbian profile", and she says in one of her routines something that I used to think: Oh. . . God! I'm not a lesbian. I'm a gay man with heterosexual tendencies, living in the body of a woman! :rainbow:

Which leaves us with a clear view of the idiocy of stereotype.

Now as for the sex attitudes you allude to Awediot: Yeah, girl on girl action has been a standard part of erotica/porn for a long time. My husband's take is that basically everyone is aroused by it - I don't know if he has any statistics on that, but that seems to be a cultural consensus. Man on man, for whatever reason, is not.

Hubby and I went to a performance of Zumanity in Las Vegas (that's Cirque du Soleil's "sex show"). When we bought our tickets, the lady in the booth issued warning after warning that it was very very graphically sexy and we might be offended. Silly. It was a lot of lovely choreography, intended to be sexy, some of which I found so, some of which I found neutral. But the opening scene - 2 women poured into an enormous champagne glass, eh. . .enjoying one another. I was expecting to see a lot of girl/boy and some girl/girl stuff. No surprises there.

But halfway thru the show, I suddenly had misgivings. They introduced us to a group of macho-posturing guys, strutting around and sort of slapping each other, and I thought - wait a minute, are they going to make this the gay scene? yes, they were! Into the midst of this butch-fest they introduced a guy dressed head to toe in pink who goes to caress Mr. Macho, and it immediately turns into a simulated gay-bashing. The bashing drags on for an uncomfortably long time, and I sat there waiting expectantly for the "surprise" ending when Mr Macho changes his mind and kisses the guy he has just beaten half to death. Finally, the moment came, and the entire audience groaned - the guy next to us muttered, "Ew that's wrong." And I sat there wishing they would have rather left that scene out than try to make a statement, which imo did not work.

What I don't understand is why our society has this programming? What creates it? Why is it that even women get turned off by man on man action? I'm not, and I would have preferred that sex show to have just treated their gay scene as eroticism like all the others. But to do that would have, apparently, been too much for the audience. Hell, one kiss was too much for the audience.

As someone who has never had the experience of being put off by gay male sexuality, I simply Do No Get It. I think all tastefully done erotica is sexy, whoever is participating. I do not understanding the revulsion that people obviously feel. Aw heck, a soprano friend of mine was chatting with me recently about one of her best friends, a gay guy, when she suddenly said, "But it's just so disgusting to think that he has sex with his boyfriend." I was floored that she even thought to say something like that in conversation. And she could not explain WHY she thought so. And I can't understand why she WOULD think so.

[awediot]

Thanks ladies (and only ladies: another hhmmmm?) (maybe I'm super gay?) (feel like I'm playing hopscotch all over again)

Not sure what i was after (just like a man) ... i have some great lesbian friends, but it is not because we share in being gay, just because we click on other things. I have tons of gay male "friends" only because we are both gay. Odd. I think womens innate ability to form more 'intimate' (not sexual) relationships, and share emotions freely is one thing i am jealous about (you can keep the birthing thing though):p

Ya popped my Cirque de soliel bubble Zerbie. Caught them in Vegas a few years back (Mystere show or something) and thought they were great. Sounds like a wierd presentation for a group that seems above homophobia. Oh well... :sick: I'd get overe it quick.

and I really don't care why mano y mano action isn't more prevelent, it just ticks me off...:mad: :lol:

[tdogg]

I think everyone has really good points here. People as a whole (oh my gosh, here I am stereotyping!) I believe look at things narrowly. For instance, most people would miss a red tailed hawk sitting on a post at the side of the freeway (we might be thankful for that actually, if everyone checked it out no one would be looking at the freeway...), because their attention scope is very narrow. Probably the people who profess to have a problem with lesbian or gay sex (the ones that say YUCK) haven't really ever thought about it much themselves. Their friends, family, acquaintenances say yuck so they do also. The sexual act is a beautiful when its not exploited in a sickly way (I guess that's a matter of opinion also but I think you get my drift), doesn't matter who is involved as far as man/woman, man/man, woman/woman. I even find animals mating to be somewhat erotic and believe me, I have no desire to be involved! But the act and the thought of what they must be feeling is somewhat erotic.

If those who find same-sex sex yucky would really think about it, and think of it in the terms of its natural beauty and love, and how the the people involved must be feeling, I think they would find it quite appealing. But they just don't put that much thought into it. By the way, I find two men loving each other to be quite erotic. It's a beautiful thing when we can express our love to another that way - it's even more intimate than sharing our feelings Awe.

I was thinking next time in Vegas to catch that show Zerbie, but now I'm not sure. Don't think I want to see a show where someone gets beat up. Hmmmm....might have burst my bubble too on that one!

[Zerbie]

Well, a matter of opinion I s'pose. I was put off by the treatment of gay men in Zumanity, yes.

And I freakin' *loved* the champagne glass ladies. I found it incredibly erotic. My absolute fave - and the very first scene of the show, so everything after was downhill for me.

As to the gay scene - I think it was intended as a "message piece" to make the public aware and think twice about gay guys. The simulated bashing bothered me so much because it reminded me of when I worked with gay bashers - and besides, who needs to pay $100 to hear homophobic epithets, see a simulated gay bashing, complete with "Kill the f*g!"?

It's at that moment when the guy who was about to kill him suddenly has a change of heart, scoops him into his arms and plants a big open mouthed kiss on him. The choreographer was trying to send a message to the audience with this scene (I guess), but unfortunately, it comes across as self-conscious and uncomfortable. I felt awkward just sitting in the dark and watching.

It struck me as a lame attempt to confront homophobia that backfired. I don't know tho- towards the end of the show all the couples come back out onstage and take positions like they are simulating sexual activity, and the master of ceremonies has a line or two to say about each couple. The guy who got gay-bashed halfway thru the performance is now on his knees in front of the guy who bashed him - a fact which I found to send an incredibly offensive message :mad: - and the master of ceremonies says, "Look at these two gentlemen. They may not procreate, but they sure can decorate!" :(

It blew my mind. I thought about writing a letter of complaint, but couldn't figure out who/where to address such a letter, so I didn't write one.

[Zerbie]

Well I never found animal sex erotic - except, until - march of the penguins. It's downright romantic!! I get all gooey watching the penguin mating scene! Hubby & I just watched it the other night, and we got all cuddly in response. :D

[tdogg]

...romantic is a better way to put it! :eek: March of the Penguins was great, although i liked the documentary about how the movie was made even better. :love:

[awediot]

Whhheeew! Y'all scared me for a second there... THREAD 2: Who likes Animal Sex more? Men or Women.
(they just seem to be humping to me, but I've not watched penguins do it yet) (seen some geese though, but I'd seen the guy goose with another gander not two hours prior. Joined for life my butt... )

tdogg, you got me thinking, how often do we actually observe TRUE Love Making? Eroticism, done well, means staged well... Mirrors maybe?

And Zerbie, i remember as well my first exposure to the "family". Of course it was the worst of stereotypes, as they are the most noticeable, and I was not going to be a drag queen, I wasn't trapped in the wrong body, I didn't like boy scouts enough to rise to the position of leader/molester, and alter boys are to girly. What to do? Takes a bit to see the normal, equally freaked guys on the sidelines... and no more about Zumanity! That sounds like it way missed the mark...:sick: I'm so disappointed...

[Zerbie]

...romantic is a better way to put it! :eek: March of the Penguins was great, although i liked the documentary about how the movie was made even better. :love:


Omigosh! *Me too!!!* :lol:

I really enjoyed the diary entries - they were so poetic! And a lot of the shots I liked so much better!

Hubby put that on last week and I kept saying, "Wow, this is even better than I remember it!!! " When I finally said, WAIT a Minute I know I didn't see this before! He told me we were watching one of the special features, not the movie. I was greatly relieved to know my memory wasn't utterly trashed. :lol:

[tdogg]

Well, I'm glad you are both relieved! :lol: No, animals don't quite do it for me (thank goodness!)! :eek:

tdogg, you got me thinking, how often do we actually observe TRUE Love Making? Eroticism, done well, means staged well... Mirrors maybe?


I don't think we observe it too often...perhaps in the occasional well done movie - rare IMO. But more in the unspoken, unacted gestures beween 2 people, a look, a tilt of the head, a brief soft touch.

Speaking of animals, yesterday me and my squeeze did a little birding (yes I'm a birdwatcher) for a local birding club 'birdathon' and I got to see a pair of grebes (small water duck-like birds) determinedly building a nest. It was so sweet. :love:

[Mia14]

The sexual act is a beautiful when its not exploited in a sickly way (I guess that's a matter of opinion also but I think you get my drift), doesn't matter who is involved as far as man/woman, man/man, woman/woman. I even find animals mating to be somewhat erotic and believe me, I have no desire to be involved! But the act and the thought of what they must be feeling is somewhat erotic.

I think I tend to agree with t-dogg :agree:(you put it much better than I could have). Sexual union, as long as it's done in a meaningful way, is beautiful. Whether it's between men, women, one of each, or any of the in-betweens, I think it's beautiful and can excite something erotic when you think in terms of emotions and feelings of those involved. I usually feel the same reaction when watching any type of love scene in a movie - that mushy, lovey, close-to-you, and love-you-with-kisses kind of feeling.