“Just Straight Acting or Just Straight Trippin' in the Gay Community”

Why is the term “Straight Acting” used within the gay community? People may disagree with me, but this term is wrong and should not be tolerated, it only further divides and bashes the gay community.

The term ‘straight acting’ usually describes a gay or bi man who does not exhibit the appearances or mannerisms of the 'gay stereotype' (Boreham).

Problem #1: It's impossible for a gay man to be straight acting, unless you are actually straight and have sex with women; you are NOT straight.

Problem #2: Some 'straight acting' gay men use this identity to 'pass' so people can't identify them as being gay. Which can be used as a form of self-hatred, but you’re only hurting yourself, if you’re just 'acting' all of your life then no one will ever know your true self and neither will you.

Problem #3: Last I Checked: 'Straight acting' gay men still like having sex with other men; just because a gay man is masculine does not mean that he is better than any other gay man.

 Problem #4: Even though the terms Masculine and Feminine are problematic in their own right, these terms are so much better to use instead of 'straight acting'.

 Problem #5: No matter how you frame the term 'straight acting'; it is still a term that is demeaning to all gay people, masculine or feminine. The term is rooted in the idea that straight men are better than gay men.

In the book Sissyphobia: Gay Men and Effeminate Behavior by Tim Bergling, he states “If we ourselves can't embrace, even celebrate, the differences we find within our own family (Gay Community), how can we expect an often mystified, and sometimes hostile, straight world to ever fully welcome us into its fold or, conversely, just leave us the hell alone” (3) ? Bergling is so right, if we continue to promote hatred within the gay community through these terms, how can we ever grow as a community and get more people within the straight community to start accepting us. Some people say that the term 'straight acting' is acceptable because people have the right to their own identity or preference in who their attracted to. I completely understand everyone does have a right to their own preference in men or identity, I know I do. But when the terms people use go from just being a preference to discriminating against others in the gay community that is where the problem lies. Andy Boreham states, “The term 'straight acting' is based in misogyny and a fear of possessing feminine traits” (aaronandandy.com). Most gay men use this term to reassert their normative hegemonic masculinity; it's hard enough to be a man attracted to other men, so some gay men use this term to ensure that they are not seen as a 'stereotypical' effeminate gay man and that they only exhibit masculine traits.

Some men who identity as 'straight acting' think that 'stereotypical' gay men who are effeminate are just putting on a show or just acting. I really think it doesn't matter whether you are acting masculine or feminine, if you are acting or putting on a show in anyway besides just being you’re true self that is WRONG. Whatever you identify as that is great, be yourself, but do not think that you have to put on an act or be someone you’re not whether it is to fit into a gay stereotype or to a subvert stereotype. The only way to really rise above is to just be you and to not let others sway that in anyway. Using negative and disrespectful terms like 'straight acting' to identify yourself or someone else has to stop because in the end it just reinforces the negative stigma that is placed on gay men.

                                       

                                               

                                                             Works Cited

    Bergling, Tim. Sissyphobia: Men and Effeminate Behavior. New York: Southern Tier Editions, 2001. 

                Print

    Boreham, Andy. "Gay New Zealand on the Web!" Aaron and Andy.com. 10 Feb. 2012. Web. 19 Apr.

                2012. <http://aaronandandy.com/>.    

     

Vincent Chin Case: More than a Hate Crime- Racialized Masculinity

In my Contemporary Asian American Issues class this semester, we talk a lot about the Vincent Chin case, which was the beginning of the pan-ethnic Asian American Movement in 1980’s because the case was seen as a hate crime attack toward the Asian American Community but the case pre-dated hate crime laws in the United States. VINCENT WHO? For those who don’t know about the Vincent Chin case, here’s a quick synopsis of what happened:

“On the night of 19 June 1982, Vincent Chin, a twenty-seven-year-old Chinese American draftsman, stopped in a Detroit bar with three friends to celebrate Chin’s upcoming wedding. While in the bar, Chin became involved in a fist fight with Ronald Ebens, a white Chrysler factory foreman. The dispute continued into the parking lot, where Ebens pulled a baseball bat from his car. Chin and his friends fled. For the next half hour, Ebens and his stepson, Michael Nitz, allegedly stalked Chin, eventually locating him in front of a fast food restaurant. There, while Nitz grabbed Chin from behind, Ebens struck at least four blows to Chin’s head. The Highland Park police arrested Ebens and Nitz at the scene. Chin died four days later from severe head injuries. Instead of celebrating Chin’s wedding, his guests attended his funeral” (Espiritu 141).

There were so many battles in court about whether this case was just a drunken brawl gone wrong or a hate crime. The only thing in court that could link this case to being a hate crime was the fact that in the bar Ebens said, “It's because of you little motherfuckers that were out of work". Ebens was referring to job's being lost to Japan, even though Vincent Chin is not even Japanese he's Chinese. But my Professor helped me realize that there had to be a motivation or intent for Ebens to literally beat Chin to death, and race was not the only factor. This got passed over in the case a lot, but the first interaction with Ebens and Chin in the bar was Ebens called Chin a boy instead of a man and Chin retorted "Do not call me a boy". In the first interactions, race is not even a factor between them; what is a factor is the reasserting of masculinity and manhood. After this interaction, they got heated and Chin threw the first punch at Ebens inside the bar.  My Professor stated that "Yes, race was a factor in the case, but it was not the motivation to go out of his way to beat Chin to death". So what was the motivating factor for Ebens to get a baseball bat from his car and beat Chin's skull in. Well, from my realization I think racialized masculinity had a primary factor in the killing of Chin. Race has always been a crucial part of the construction of the masculine identity; the formation of nonwhite masculinity was because of white men being in the hierarchal view of masculinity and oppressing and excluding nonwhite men (Carroll 383). Every racial male identity group has different stereotypes and expectations ascribed to them; like white men are dominant, strong, and powerful and Asian men are weak, soft spoken, passive, and submissive. So when Chin punched Ebens to the ground in the middle of the bar and Chin was standing over Ebens in a stance of dominance, there was a major threat to Ebens Dominant White Masculinity. The hierarchal view of masculinity had shifted and Chin a Chinese American man (whose identity would suggest that he's passive) had dominated Ebens, a white American man. Obviously, Ebens being a white man could not let himself stay emasculated by a Chinese American man; he had to reassert his masculinity in some way. So when they all got kicked out of the bar, instead of just going home, Ebens purposely drove around looking for Chin to regain his dominance. THAT WAS THE INTENT AND MOTIVATION. Masculinity is inherently violent, but people don't realize that maintaining this constructed violent dominance and power can mean someone's death.

Carroll, Bret E. American Masculinities: A Historical Encyclopedia.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 
        Publications,2003. Print.

Espiritu, Yen Le. Asian American Panethnicity: Bridging Institutions and Identities.  Philadelphia:  
        Temple UP,1992.

Is there a Gay Masculinity ?

Who gets to decide what makes a man……A MAN ?  In American culture,  gay men are usually dominated by straight men because gay men always seem to be feminized  by society since they do not fit into the strict hegemonic masculinity. Hegemonic masculinity is the belief that there exists a dominant cultural normative ideal of the male behavior and identity (McCann and Kim 239). Well at least from my perspective, men are socialized at a young age to fit into these strict gender norms and abide by societal gendered expectations. But as soon as a person steps outside of those expectations and boundaries, they get labeled as “the other” especially gay men because they are then feminized. I can remember being told at a young age “boys don’t dance, that’s only for girls” or “don’t talk like that, you sound so feminine”. I definitely did not fit into the dominant hegemonic masculinity, so then where do I or gay men in general fit in ?  I wouldn’t say I’m completely feminine or completely masculine, then where does that put me.  R.W. Connell states “Gay masculinity is the most conspicuous, but it is not only subordinated masculinity. Some heterosexual men and boys too are expelled from the circle of legitimacy” (McCann and Kim 238). R.W. Connell, a theorist on the construction of masculinity believes that there is a gay masculinity, she believes there are multiple masculinities because the dominant masculinity is so limiting that there are even straight men that don’t fit into the dominant masculinity. Although I would like to think that there is not a division in masculinity between gay men and straight men, there are obvious privileges that straight men receive over gay men in society. Whether I fit into masculinity or not or whether I even have a masculinity, I think it’s important to remember that masculinity/feminity are socially constructed labels, Labels shouldn’t define people in the first place because they are so limiting. Don’t let it define you, Whether you believe in fitting into the masculine/ feminine role or you say ”FUCK THE GENDER BINARY”, Remember to just do you !

McCann, Carole R., and Seung-kyung Kim, eds. Feminist Theory Reader: Local and Global Perspectives. 2nd ed. London ; New York: Routledge, 2010. Print.