Gay men personals...
Tigua Alan Naghel Jackson
since I don't limit myself to any race. But being a man of color, black
with a little French and Native American, I'm constantly forced to
consider the implications of dating someone white. I should say, it's more
that being a black American I am forced to consider the implications
of dating a white. Particularly, the prime question is: is he
dating me because I'm black?
This is all secondary, though, to the reason why I'm posting in the first place
which is for white men to consider: When placing an ad why say, 'GWM seeks same,
no fats no fems' when what you mean to say is, 'GWM seeks <whatever> no colored,
no fats, no fems...'?
Of course, my version is 'racist.' But I'm the only one saying that...
Because denial does nothing...
I think that an admission of the true state of affairs in your mind set
can only weaken the huge racial barrier that exists within the gay community.
I'm not interested in any responses although that's not to say that
I won't entertain them...
I just wanted to bring something to attention for personal reflection.
tigua
D. Owen Rowley
> I should say, it's more
> that being a black American I am forced to consider the implications
> of dating a white. Particularly, the prime question is: is he
> dating me because I'm black?
I've been dating a black man, because he's a man.
>This is all secondary, though to the reason why I'm posting in the first place
>which is for white men to consider: When placing an ad why say, GWM seeks same
>no fats no fems' when what you mean to say is, 'GWM seeks whatever no colored
>no fats, no fems...'?
I think you are making a big assumption here regarding the motivation
of the language used in ads.
For one thing there are other racial types besides black and white!
Here in San francisco Asian and Latino are both significant
portions of the overall population.
Heres a question for you, do you think that BWMT is a racist
organisation?
LUX ./. owen
--
D. Owen Rowley {uunet,fernwood,sun}!autodesk!owen, ow...@autodesk.com
[ EU-PHORIA: A STATE OF WELL BEING ]
Euphoria is my natural state, I do what I enjoy and an abundance
of all good fortune comes to me for it.
David O'Donnell
>which is for white men to consider: When placing an ad why say,
>'GWM seeks same, no fats no fems' when what you mean to say is,
>'GWM seeks <whatever> no colored, no fats, no fems...'?
Perhaps because "no colored" (or "no blacks/hispanics/asians...") is
racist, and we all know the PC Rules won't let us get away with that,
but being anti-overweight or anti-effeminate is ok because "real" gays
AREN'T fat or anything less than Jeff-Strykeresque.
--Dave O'Donnell
atr...@netlab.cis.brown.edu
If Brown University Knew I Posted This, They'd Probably Deny My Existence.
PS -- For those whose terminals are sarcastically-challenged, this article is
liberally covered with sarcastoidal pixels.
Mark Ryan Miller
|> I recently found myself attracted to a white guy, which isn't unusual
|> since I don't limit myself to any race. But being a man of color, black
|> with a little French and Native American, I'm constantly forced to
|> consider the implications of dating someone white. I should say, it's more
|> that being a black American I am forced to consider the implications
|> of dating a white. Particularly, the prime question is: is he
|> dating me because I'm black?
|>
|> This is all secondary, though, to the reason why I'm posting in the first place
|> which is for white men to consider: When placing an ad why say, 'GWM seeks same,
|> no fats no fems' when what you mean to say is, 'GWM seeks <whatever> no colored,
|> no fats, no fems...'?
|>
|> Of course, my version is 'racist.' But I'm the only one saying that...
My Asian boyfriend and I have been together for 1 1/2 years now.
He knows I have a preference for Asian men, or men with black hair, or
men with darker skin. Honestly, I am rarely attracted by European men, it
takes someone exceptional to get my attention.
For me, it's a preference. I don't date my boyfriend just because he's
Asian. Yes, I'm a rice queen, but a nice one. I met Bill in a bar.
We're both shy. I was there alone and was looking for someone to dance
with and saw him standing against the wall. He looked lonely too, so I
took a chance and asked him to dance. We were very close from that
night on. What happened was that we were both looking for that special
someone.
Maybe white people ask for "same". I've never thought that racist, but
I suppose it could be. I would think that they just are turned on by
people of the same color? For me, I find pale skin unattractive, and
don't care for tans much.
Bill's friend who is also Asian, and very promiscuous, once paid me a great
compliment. He said I was the only rice queen he knew who didn't try
to hit on him, and said that he admired our relationship.
So, I suppose some people are racist, and some are just expressing
a preference.
--Mark
Greg Parkinson
|> since I don't limit myself to any race. But being a man of color, black
|> with a little French and Native American, I'm constantly forced to
|> consider the implications of dating someone white. I should say, it's more
|> that being a black American I am forced to consider the implications
|> of dating a white. Particularly, the prime question is: is he
|> dating me because I'm black?
Are you dating him because he's white? Can't you
consider the possibility that his attraction to you
can be similar to your attraction to him - whatever
that is?
|> This is all secondary, though, to the reason why I'm posting in the first place
|> which is for white men to consider: When placing an ad why say, 'GWM seeks same,
|> no fats no fems' when what you mean to say is, 'GWM seeks <whatever> no colored,
|> no fats, no fems...'?
You're right. Why shouldn't the ads I see that say
'GBM seeks same' be more honest and say 'GBM seeks
<whatever> no whites'?
|> Of course, my version is 'racist.' But I'm the only one saying that...
You'd like to think so, apparently. There's no
denying the racism of large numbers of people, gays
and lesbians being no exception. But we're not talking
about employment, or housing, we're talking about
physical attraction. I'm aware that misogyny is
common in men; does that mean that by not being
attracted to women I'm a misogynist?
I've gone out with blond white men, I've gone out
with latinos, I've gone out with black men. I
went out with them because I was attracted to them
physically and (usually) emotionally and intellectually.
Am I not allowed my own discovery of my tastes and
desires? I have the feeling you would be just as
upset by `GWM seeks GBM' as you are 'GWM seeks same',
but what if I discovered that I found darker men
more attractive? I don't think this is as simple
as you're making it out to be.
|> Because denial does nothing...
|> I think that an admission of the true state of affairs in your mind set
|> can only weaken the huge racial barrier that exists within the gay community.
There is a huge barrier, but I don't think that
personal ads are the biggest problem.
|> I'm not interested in any responses although that's not to say that
|> I won't entertain them...
You post here, you take what comes. You have absolutely
no right to make blanket statements that include me
and expect that I (or other people) won't take issue
with them.
|> I just wanted to bring something to attention for personal reflection.
Meaning you want to have *your* say and no discussion. Feh.
--
Greg Parkinson Phone: 212-657-7814 Fax: 212-825-8607
Citibank,111 Wall Street E-Mail: g...@fig.citib.com
New York, New York 10043
The opinions expressed are my own and not those of the big 'ol bank.
Anthony Berno
Alan Naghel Jackson) writes:
> This is all secondary, though, to the reason why I'm
> posting in the first place which is for white men to
> consider: When placing an ad why say, 'GWM seeks same,
> no fats no fems' when what you mean to say is, 'GWM seeks
> <whatever> no colored, no fats, no fems...'?
>
> Of course, my version is 'racist.' But I'm the only one
> saying that...
Why is it "racist" to prefer one race over another in a sexual context?
This makes no more sense than saying that a taste for men over women is
sexist.
Not wanting to "date" a person based on their race is very different from
not liking or associating with them.
In a sexual context, physical characteristics are important. I, for
example, am pretty much incapable of responding sexually to anyone that
does not have facial hair. This immediately eliminates most asians from my
love life, not on the basis of their race, but because few asian men have
moustaches or beards.
"GWM seeks same" is more likely motivated by straighforward physical
turnons than any latent antipathy towards blacks. I wouldn't take offense
at it, nor would I shy away from anyone who was attracted to *because* of
your race.
I'd say that the set of men that are truly neutral with respect to race is
actually fairly small. Love is not, and will never be, colorblind, and I
see little point in worrying about the preferences of others.
-Anthony
Ellen Keyne Seebacher
This isn't a direct response to what Greg wrote, but somehow his
article reminded me that I wanted to post this -- my nomination for
Best Ad, after years of idly perusing the personals now and then:
"BIG FAG WANTS another big fag for love, sex, and more. Straight acting?
I don't care, and if you do, you're not a big enough fag. I'm 24, gay,
black, and my attitude is as positive as my HIV status. You're 28-48,
tall, employed, and you're aware of who you are sexually. Grab a martini
and call me! --97224."
(From the _Chicago Reader_, I think, earlier this year.)
-- __
Ellen Keyne Seebacher \/ el...@midway.uchicago.edu
"I'm not sure whether I'm a faghag because I'm bi, or bi because I'm
a faghag, or both because I'm me..." --STella
Caroline Jean Lee
Because I am Asian, I have run into lots and lots of white men with
Asian fetishes, especially before I came out as a lesbian.
And yes, I think those fetishes are racist. I have found it very
dehumanizing and hurtful to interact with men with Asian fetishes,
even when they were otherwise sensitive and kind, or when I only knew
about the fetish afterwards.
It's important to remember that in our society, "race" is a loaded
term, and it carries a lot of baggage with it that does not have
anything to do with physical appearance. People have a lot
of stereotypes floating around in their heads, folks, whether
they're aware of it or not.
For example, one of my co-workers is often mistaken for Latino. He
has seen people's interest in him change dramatically when they
find out that he is Asian.
Having to interact with men who see your race first, and the rest of
you after that, has been a common experience in the lives of all the
Asian women I know, and of many ofthe gay Asian men I know. Those
often hurtful interactions with men with Asian fetishes are part of
what it has meant to be an Asian American woman in this country.
For myself, in the mixed-up time as I was coming out and getting over
my flurries of heterosexual activity, I decided that I would not date
white men anymore because of the associations of colonialism,
mail-order brides, exoticism, etc., as well as the possibility that
once again, the person might be attracted to me because of my race and
because of the associations he might have about Asians.
Since I came out, it's happened that I have only slept with Asian
women and only fooled around with other women of color. Fortunately,
although some women do have Asian fetishes, it's overwhelmingly a male
thing. (White women tend to be into/appropriate Native American
culture and women instead). Were I to become involved with a white
woman, though, I would have to ask myself the same questions Tigua is
asking now: is my race a factor in their attraction to me? is my race
or "cultural heritage" the part of me that they see first, before
the rest of me? and so on. They are hard questions to ask. I emphathize
with Tigua.
Caroline
Bil Snodgrass
>In article <1993Jan6.0...@athena.mit.edu> s...@athena.mit.edu (Tigua
>Alan Naghel Jackson) writes:
>
>> This is all secondary, though, to the reason why I'm
>> posting in the first place which is for white men to
>> consider: When placing an ad why say, 'GWM seeks same,
>> no fats no fems' when what you mean to say is, 'GWM seeks
>> <whatever> no colored, no fats, no fems...'?
>>
>> Of course, my version is 'racist.' But I'm the only one
>> saying that...
>
>Why is it "racist" to prefer one race over another in a sexual context?
It isn't....I would never rule out a person because of his color, but
God I hope he is dark!!!!!
This shit about it being racist is trash. Just like some folks out
there trying to say it is wrong not to be attracted to fat men. (I am
fat and I am not attracted to fat men.) It is all preference, personal
preference.......
>This makes no more sense than saying that a taste for men over women is
>sexist.
Very good point.
>
>Not wanting to "date" a person based on their race is very different from
>not liking or associating with them.
>
>I'd say that the set of men that are truly neutral with respect to race is
>actually fairly small. Love is not, and will never be, colorblind, and I
>see little point in worrying about the preferences of others.
>
>-Anthony
Bil Snodgrass
(hey, I like men who use soap, guess I am a soapist!)
Steve Dyer
>In article <1993Jan7.0...@godel.questor.wimsey.bc.ca> abe...@godel.questor.wimsey.bc.ca writes:
>>Why is it "racist" to prefer one race over another in a sexual context?
>
>It isn't....I would never rule out a person because of his color, but
>God I hope he is dark!!!!!
>This shit about it being racist is trash.
I think the comments here have been a bit facile. Not because I necessarily
disagree with them, but that the situation is so much more complicated than
that, and to simply reduce this to a "matter of personal preference" as if
there might not be something else going on there, is to be open to the
charge of cluelessness.
Listen, when 80% or more of the personal ads say "GWM seeks GWM", what does
this say to men of color who might not be as discriminating? When most of
these GWM's have grown up in a segregated society such that even the idea
of having sex with someone who is not their race doesn't even _occur_ to them,
how can you reduce this simply to a matter of "personal preference"? It's
not "personal preference", it's usually blind acceptance of the conventions
which they've grown up with which echo the racism in our society. And for
some of them, it's more blatant racism.
This is not to say that you can dictate on an individual level what is
appropriate behavior, but to refuse to look at what might be going on
on a personal level or more systemically under the excuse that's it's
all "personal preference" is typical white-boy cluelessness.
>Just like some folks out
>there trying to say it is wrong not to be attracted to fat men. (I am
>fat and I am not attracted to fat men.) It is all preference, personal
>preference.......
Yeah, yeah, self-hatred doesn't have much to do with it, does it?
--
Steve Dyer
dy...@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
a flying squirrel
>And yes, I think those fetishes are racist. I have found it very
>dehumanizing and hurtful to interact with men with Asian fetishes,
> [...]
>Since I came out, it's happened that I have only slept with Asian
>women and only fooled around with other women of color. Fortunately,
>although some women do have Asian fetishes, it's overwhelmingly a male
>thing. (White women tend to be into/appropriate Native American
>culture and women instead). Were I to become involved with a white
>woman, though, I would have to ask myself the same questions Tigua is
I guess I am a clueless fuck. First you call it a "fetish" when other
people are attracted to you, and then state you have only slept with
other Asians. Of course, _you_ don't have a fetish, right? By that
same logic, my "fetish" for big cocks doesn't really exist since I
have one myself. Only the average or underendowed can be size queens.
Am I reading your posting correctly, Caroline?
--
a flying squirrel is: ric...@apple.com Apple Computer Inc.
"Sex is a filter, and it admits a certain vision." - William S. Burroughs
Bil Snodgrass
>In article <1993Jan7.0...@lclark.edu> snod...@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan7.0...@godel.questor.wimsey.bc.ca> abe...@godel.questor.wimsey.bc.ca writes:
>>>Why is it "racist" to prefer one race over another in a sexual context?
>>
>>It isn't....I would never rule out a person because of his color, but
>>God I hope he is dark!!!!!
>
>>This shit about it being racist is trash.
>
>I think the comments here have been a bit facile.
Possibly, but my reaction is to the other great great generalization out
there that I am a bigot because of my preference for darker skined people.....
Not because I necessarily
>disagree with them, but that the situation is so much more complicated than
I would only like to add that in "some" situations, it is so much more
complicated......But then again the reasons I like darker colored men
are also more complicated....not just the color of one's skin. I love
Hispanic men who have close ties to Hispanic traditions and culture. I miss
the Hispanic influence that was so very very prevelant in San Antonio....
>that, and to simply reduce this to a "matter of personal preference" as if
>there might not be something else going on there, is to be open to the
>charge of cluelessness.
Agree whole heartedly. But then again in the context that I am coming
from this would not apply to me personally....and I would venture to
guess to a few other people out there either....
>
>Listen, when 80% or more of the personal ads say "GWM seeks GWM", what does
>this say to men of color who might not be as discriminating?
Get in line.....no fats, no fems, no HIV+, straight acting only, no bars,
....and on. When I read the ads, yes I even read the GWM ads, I usually
see something that I might like once a month or so....And that is
using 4 different sources in the Oregon area......
When most of
>these GWM's have grown up in a segregated society such that even the idea
>of having sex with someone who is not their race doesn't even _occur_ to them,
This is very probable.....and it is sad.
>how can you reduce this simply to a matter of "personal preference"?
Because I, Bil Snodgrass III, said it was a personal preference.
That word personal is the key to my statement.
It's
>not "personal preference", it's usually blind acceptance of the conventions
>which they've grown up with which echo the racism in our society.
Sadly it is for the most part....but then again you would think that I
a white male would perfer white men when I really don't get too turned on
by them. If I went by your model I would have prefered white men
first, then when I opened up my mind and became interested in darker colored
people, wouldn't I still like white men?
And for
>some of them, it's more blatant racism.
Hell you don't even have to talk about the dating part to see the
racism in our GLBO community....It is unbelievable and it shouldn't
be tolerated in our community....
>
>This is not to say that you can dictate on an individual level what is
>appropriate behavior, but to refuse to look at what might be going on
>on a personal level or more systemically under the excuse that's it's
>all "personal preference" is typical white-boy cluelessness.
So much of what you are saying is so true, but then you seem
to say that I am a typical White-Boy cluelessness......
So not only are you not recongizing me for my true individualism, but
you are also generalizing that I am a racist.
I am not a racist.....sorry to disappoint you and blow your generalization
of me out of the water....
>
>>Just like some folks out
>>there trying to say it is wrong not to be attracted to fat men. (I am
>>fat and I am not attracted to fat men.) It is all preference, personal
>>preference.......
>
>Yeah, yeah, self-hatred doesn't have much to do with it, does it?
You want an excuse for everything? .I really don't know why some
men like fat men...I am clueless....but they do and I was lucky to
have one that made me realize that I am a beautiful person....
especially when society has told me all my life that I am a gross
pig.....
I have noticed that whenever you discuss weight issues you very
often project your own negative feelings about your own weight on to other fat
people.
>
>--
>Steve Dyer
>dy...@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Bil Snodgrass III
(possibly the closest we have ever agreed Steve)
Greg Parkinson
In article <1993Jan7.0...@netcom.com>, cj...@netcom.com (Caroline Jean Lee) writes:
|> Tigua's post struck a familiar chord in me.
|>
|> Because I am Asian, I have run into lots and lots of white men with
|> Asian fetishes, especially before I came out as a lesbian.
|>
|> And yes, I think those fetishes are racist. I have found it very
|> dehumanizing and hurtful to interact with men with Asian fetishes,
|> even when they were otherwise sensitive and kind, or when I only knew
|> about the fetish afterwards.
And it's important to make a distinction between fetishes
and attraction.
OK, I'll be perfectly honest here. Living in NYC I am around
people of all races, all the time. I find a lot of black
men very attractive, I find the majority of NYC latinos
attractive, and I find a fair number of lighter-skinned guys
attractive.
The biggest problem I've had when dating people is not
skin color, but culture. I have so little in common with
a lot of the black gay men in NYC that it's very hard to
connect. I can see a guy, talk to him, and come away feeling
completely lost. No one's fault, but that's just the way it
is. So the black guys that I've gone out with have tended
to be middle-class professionals. It's the same with latinos
and white guys, too.
So I don't think I could call my attraction to darker-skinned
men a "fetish" in the way Caroline uses it, since I'm not
projecting fantasies of banjiBoy or blackSexAnimalWithHugeDick,
I'm saying "what a hot, attractive man" and taking it from
there. And if I often find men with darker skin attractive,
could that mean that I'm *less* racist than my upbringing
should have left me?
D. Owen Rowley
> I think the comments here have been a bit facile. Not because I necessarily
> disagree with them, but that the situation is so much more complicated than
> that, and to simply reduce this to a "matter of personal preference" as if
> there might not be something else going on there, is to be open to the
> charge of cluelessness.
The inherant limitations of this medium tend to exacerbate the problems
of disscussing complex issues, and reducing particular arguments to
certain facets doesn't always signify that the writer is ignorant
of the other factors.
I suspect that most folks don't know why they have one preference or
another. I also suspect that everyones preferences are *colored* by
racialism of one stripe or another.. ( that includes both pro and con)
> Listen, when 80% or more of the personal ads say "GWM seeks GWM", what does
> this say to men of color who might not be as discriminating? When most of
> these GWM's have grown up in a segregated society such that even the idea
> of having sex with someone who is not their race doesn't even _occur_ to them,
> how can you reduce this simply to a matter of "personal preference"? It's
> not "personal preference", it's usually blind acceptance of the conventions
> which they've grown up with which echo the racism in our society. And for
> some of them, it's more blatant racism.
I've seen quite a few ads that specify GBM seeks same.
The most common qualifier seems to be age rather than race however.
How about the size queens who seek only the young and hung?
> This is not to say that you can dictate on an individual level what is
> appropriate behavior, but to refuse to look at what might be going on
> on a personal level or more systemically under the excuse that's it's
> all "personal preference" is typical white-boy cluelessness.
Ads are not always just for sex you know, in the cases where the
individual is looking for a relationship, these *qualifiers* are more
a wish-list type of thing than a negation of those who don't fit them.
> >Just like some folks out
> >there trying to say it is wrong not to be attracted to fat men. (I am
> >fat and I am not attracted to fat men.) It is all preference, personal
> >preference.......
>
> Yeah, yeah, self-hatred doesn't have much to do with it, does it?
I'd like to see us have a reasonable conversation about this topic.
It's one that affects me, and one that I think about a lot.
I've been heavy all my adult life, and I too am not (usually) attracted to
other heavy men. I'm sure that some of it is attributable to my
own feelings of self worth, I don't like the way I feel or look when
I am over 230 lbs.
I do understand the prejudice that comes with being heavy, I've
experienced it first hand. But I also understand that I like what I like,
and that isn't always determined by what I don't like.
I've been with other heavy guys who I found attractive due to other
factors, and I've had some fun times with them. But I also find that
I'm still bothered by the weight factor. I try to not let it affect the way
I feel about the person, but it is a complicated issue.
For me when I get to a certain size, or am with others of certain size
it reminds me of my father who was over 380 lbs at his heaviest.
Frankly it scares me, his health problems, and the constraints on his life
were directly involved with his weight. He died at age 55.
Those who do not have a predisposition to weight gain cannot know the
problems our society presents to those of us who do. I know I will never
be thin, but I also know that if I eat sensibly and exercise regularly
I can keep my weight at levels which I do find comfortable.
I don't think that just because I am heavy, I am obligated to find
heaviness attractive, thats just as much bullshit as the other.
Steve Dyer
>I guess I am a clueless fuck. First you call it a "fetish" when other
>people are attracted to you, and then state you have only slept with
>other Asians. Of course, _you_ don't have a fetish, right? By that
>same logic, my "fetish" for big cocks doesn't really exist since I
>have one myself. Only the average or underendowed can be size queens.
>
>Am I reading your posting correctly, Caroline?
Well, you're reading it correctly for a white boy. :-)/2
Daniel Gilly
(Caroline Jean Lee) writes:
>Tigua's post struck a familiar chord in me.
I've been noticing a common experience in recent weeks here:
1) Nelson objects when older men admire him for being young.
2) Brent objects when men admire him because his penis is large.
3) Tigua objects when white men admire him because he is black.
4) And now Caroline voices a similar objection to Asian fetishes.
I've been intrigued to learn about the ways people feel
objectified. I'm not invalidating the experiences that have been
presented, but for me personally, I'm flattered whenever someone
finds me desirable because of, for example, my body type or
complexion or height or age, etc., or any combination of these.
As Joe Francis pointed out in responding to Brent, we often
discount the motives of those who desire us for the "wrong"
reasons. "Wrong" reasons seem to be anything that makes us feel
exploited or devalued. So I can see how I, too, would soon be
annoyed if someone's initial attraction to me did not lead to an
appreciation of my thoughts, feelings, interests, etc. (Assuming
I'm seeking companionship as opposed to short-term
physical gratification.)
After reading the articles from people who have felt devalued, I
was wondering on what basis it might be okay for someone to find
someone else attractive. Would it be okay, for example, for a
white motas (member of the appropriate sex) to find your dark
complexion erotic as an initial "hook" to motivate getting to know
you better, provided that they eventually support your philosophy
and hobbies (or in some way see you as a complete person)?
>Because I am Asian, I have run into lots and lots of white men with
>Asian fetishes, especially before I came out as a lesbian.
This situation probably involves a power imbalance between men and women
in addition to the cross-cultural stereotypes.
>And yes, I think those fetishes are racist. I have found it very
>dehumanizing and hurtful to interact with men with Asian fetishes,
>even when they were otherwise sensitive and kind, or when I only knew
>about the fetish afterwards.
>It's important to remember that in our society, "race" is a loaded
>term, and it carries a lot of baggage with it that does not have
>anything to do with physical appearance. People have a lot
>of stereotypes floating around in their heads, folks, whether
>they're aware of it or not.
The question is, who is carrying the baggage: (1) the white male
who's fond of black males because of a stereotypical expectation/myth --
e.g., presuming they'll have bigger penises? or (2) the black male
who's assuming an objectification where there might be none?
>For example, one of my co-workers is often mistaken for Latino. He
>has seen people's interest in him change dramatically when they
>find out that he is Asian.
You suggest that it's wrong for people's attitudes to change
upon learning your co-worker is Asian. And yet, 2 paragraphs above,
you state that *your* attitude toward certain white men changed
*after* you discovered they have an Asian fetish. I'm afraid I
don't understand this. It seems inconsistent. How did this
discovery change your opinion?
>Having to interact with men who see your race first, and the rest of
>you after that, has been a common experience in the lives of all the
>Asian women I know, and of many ofthe gay Asian men I know. Those
>often hurtful interactions with men with Asian fetishes are part of
>what it has meant to be an Asian American woman in this country.
I'm unclear about this. What do you mean when you say men see
your *race*? (Let me use a GWM/GAM example, since I'm more familiar
with this.) For example:
Does "seeing race" refer to men who are attracted to physical traits --
dark hair/eyes/complexion and (often) hairless bodies? Or does it
refer to men who are attracted to stereotypes of *behavior* --
submissiveness, "still-waters-run-deep" quietness, vulnerability.
Is the first one okay, or are these equally bad in your view?
>For myself, in the mixed-up time as I was coming out and getting over
>my flurries of heterosexual activity, I decided that I would not date
>white men anymore because of the associations of colonialism,
>mail-order brides, exoticism, etc., as well as the possibility that
>once again, the person might be attracted to me because of my race and
>because of the associations he might have about Asians.
I can certainly understand this.
In fact, I can identify with it, in my own way. :-)
I decided I would not date women anymore because of the
associations with my becoming a father, being able to fix a car,
being physically strong, tall, etc., as well as the possibility that
-- because of their associations about my being male -- they would
once again be attracted only to my mind. :-)/2
To sum up, I can see that your experiences have been hurtful to you,
and indeed racist in your case.
But I'm still trying to understand what constitutes racism in general
versus what constitutes an acceptable physical attraction for the
"exotic other".
Cheers,
Daniel
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Gilly Oracle Corporation
dgi...@us.oracle.com Redwood Shores, CA
William Hsu
This is a really complicated set of issues, and I can really do no
better than to muddy the waters further, but hey...
A long time ago, an African-American friend asked me: "So how does
it feel being part of a group that some men specialize in?" I guess
I don't spend a lot of time around people who date Asians exclusively,
so I'm not really bothered by the idea. Most of the people I've
dated or had sex with tend to have very flexible tastes, race-wise.
(Or maybe I'm just not "nice" enough to attract the traditional
rice queen :-))
One incident that I found really amusing: after some mutual cruising
at a dubious Chicago venue, I was approached with this opening line,
delivered with great embarrassment: "I have these Mishima fantasies..."
It was all I could do not to burst out laughing and roll around
on the floor.
As Daniel Gilly and others have pointed out, I think we need to
make the distinction between casual limited sexual encounters
and longterm relationships (or work environments etc etc). It's
obviously wrong to be forced into roles in relationships or our
daily lives because of race. But I don't mind being fetishized
for physical characteristics that are race-based, just as I don't
mind being fetishized because I have funny hair, too many earrings etc,
as long as there's respect for what *I* want to do in those
situations.
(Or am I using "fetishize" in a different way here?)
Bill
Anthony Berno
Snodgrass) writes:
> >In article <1993Jan7.0...@godel.questor.wimsey.bc.ca>
abe...@godel.questor.wimsey.bc.ca writes:
> >>Why is it "racist" to prefer one race over another in a sexual
context?
> >
> >It isn't....I would never rule out a person because of his color, but
> >God I hope he is dark!!!!!
>
> >This shit about it being racist is trash.
> I think the comments here have been a bit facile. Not
> because I necessarily disagree with them, but that the
> situation is so much more complicated than that, and to
> simply reduce this to a "matter of personal preference"
> as if there might not be something else going on there,
> is to be open to the charge of cluelessness.
Acknowledged. You are correct that many (perhaps not 80%) white males
never consider the possibility of interracial sex, and are thus mirroring
the racism of their society. My "cluelessness" is that I often assume
others to have the same exposure to the Real World (TM) that I do.
I think the larger picture here is the use of inclusive versus exclusive
language. The word "no" in personal ads is a continual assault against all
those against whom it is directed, whether the "no" is based on race,
mannerisms or physical features. Consider the difference between these two
micro-ads:
Male seeks other male for sex.
Male seeks sexual partner. No women need apply.
The first is a statement of fact. The second is a deliberate and
unnecessary barb against the opposite sex. Seeing the word "no" associated
with oneself is a hurtful experience.
Furthermore, there are issues of taste, which are highly subjective. I
admit, I am offended to some degree by "GWM seeks same" because it is
simply rubbing the reader's nose into the fact that racism exists in the
gay community. The term "straight acting" particularly infuriates me. On
one hand, this kind of specificity reduces the potential of disappointment
among respondents to an ad. On the other, it isn't all *that* difficult to
simply omit such statements from the ad and then politely decline to
engage some of the respondents.
There is a really unpleasant tendency among many members of the gay
community to not put forth the energy to even speak to those to whom one
is not sexually attracted. I encounter this a lot at bars and the baths;
their loss, I suppose, as anyone who lacks the time or energy for good
manners probably isn't worth knowing anyway.
-Anthony
Nelson Minar
difficult for me to understand, something I'm prepared to spend a lot
of time thinking about and not come to any conclusions.
In article <1993Jan7.2...@oracle.us.oracle.com> dgi...@us.oracle.com (Daniel Gilly) writes:
>I've been noticing a common experience in recent weeks here:
>1) Nelson objects when older men admire him for being young.
(it's odd to see it written that succinctly, because it sounds like I
want people to ignore my youth. But Daniel's statement isn't that bad
of a summary, in some ways. More later.)
>I've been intrigued to learn about the ways people feel
>objectified. I'm not invalidating the experiences that have been
>presented, but for me personally, I'm flattered whenever someone
>finds me desirable because of, for example, my body type or
>complexion or height or age, etc., or any combination of these.
I'm flattered when people find me attractive, for any reason. I don't
mind it if someone finds my age attractive, and I don't have a problem
with older men who have an expressed preference for men my age. Suits
me fine! But when all they care about is that I'm young:
>So I can see how I, too, would soon be annoyed if someone's initial
>attraction to me did not lead to an appreciation of my thoughts,
>feelings, interests, etc.
And this is the complication. When someone has a fantasy about
acquiring a young man, or a black person, or a young Asian wife, or a
guy with a big dick, then it can happen that this person will never go
beyond the aspects that create the fantasy. This is offensive, and
does not appear to be all that uncommon.
On the other hand, not all cases are this extreme. As you say,
secondary characteristics (age, race, etc.) can play an enormously
useful role in setting the hook for initial attraction. I don't see
any reason to think this is bad.
On the third hand, I imagine it must be unpleasant to have men hit on
you solely because of your race. I don't know what to think.
>>Because I am Asian, I have run into lots and lots of white men with
>>Asian fetishes, especially before I came out as a lesbian.
>This situation probably involves a power imbalance between men and women
>in addition to the cross-cultural stereotypes.
there's also a parallel in the gay-male community. For example,
there's the magazine "Oriental Guys" - it specializes in pictures of
young Asian men ostensibly looking for companions. It gives me the
willies - it just screams to me "objectification."
But is it that different from Chiron Rising (a magazine featuring
older men), Bear, or even a generic gay-male-porn magazine? Maybe
there's a difference in that there's an entire history to the
dominance of Asian people. If I'm not careful, I'm going to start
making claims about why porn-of-women is bad but porn-of-men is ok.
>The question is, who is carrying the baggage: (1) the white male
>who's fond of black males because of a stereotypical expectation/myth --
>e.g., presuming they'll have bigger penises? or (2) the black male
>who's assuming an objectification where there might be none?
all depends on the weight of the baggage, I guess. I've never laid
awake at night wondering if some other person is only interested in me
because I'm young. It's always seemed pretty clear to me what the
other person's interest in me is once I've talked to him for more than
five minutes. Beyond any personal feelings I might have about being
objectified (and truthfully, I don't worry about it much), I don't
think I'd care much for anyone who didn't treat other people as equal
human beings.
Jojo once said:
"Remember, you're not just a man, you're also a piece of meat."
__
nel...@reed.edu \/ This is the time, and this is the record of the time
John Dorrance
someone to have been initially attracted to you because of your
race and the connotations it has been given if they have since found
other, more substantial reasons to love you, and your race is no
longer the factor it once was? How does being attracted to someone
for their race differ from being attracted to someone for other
physical features?
--
tha...@cwis.unomaha.edu * John Dorrance * Disco Diva y Flamenco Chico
You would be surprised at what resides in your insides.
S7/9 g++l+(+)y++z++/--(++!!!)o+(+)x+a++uv(++)j+
Joseph Francis
We've discussed the question of G?M seeks same before on MOTSS,
without any sort of resolution (as though resolution is possible) and
I thought about it for more than my usual 10 seconds before replying.
It seems that there are several convergent reasons for the application
(G?M seeks same). To generalize, I feel that the problem is a part of
the system itself, and not the people. Since divergent views can arrive
at racist overtones, it is a problem of mechanism rather than intent.
1) GWM seeks same; BL/BL, 5'10", 175lbs, into romantic evenings out,
walks along the beach, safe sexual encounters with someone I know well.
No fats, fems, smokers, druggies. Pic/Pic. Serious Only.
2) GWM seeks same; Br/Br, 5'9", 180lbs. turn-ons: Alternative Music,
long hair, late-nite/early-morning hot safe sex, a joint to relax
maybe, j/o with each other to videos. No Fats/fems/smokers. Pic/pic.
3) GWM, Black Hr/Bl eyes, Bodybuilder. Bearded, 5'11", 200lbs, into
baseball, hockey. Serious FF bottom, but also have a fat cock for
willing asses. Find my limits. No fats/fems. Like a good stogey
occasionally.
4) GM, Non-drinker, non-smoker, likes quiet conversations in
coffeehouses. Activist, Socially aware, looking for more than casual
acquaintances. You get: package that gets better the more the wrapper
comes off.
Now. In a gay male magazine why would one ever see "GM", regardless of
color. That is one of the oddities.
One could rationalize that "no fats/fems" is talking about a person's
preferences, but the reality is that the statement is - "I don't like
to have relationships, sex, friendships with fat or effeminate men".
That's a pretty shocking thing to say. A person may, indeed, be
seeking slender, muscular, etc. bodies. That should be stated as such
- "seeking swimmer's builds". Inclusive. The other implies not so much
that they aren't attracted to fats/fems, but that fats/fems are so
desperate that they will tend to answer all ads no matter how boring, and
that they are terribly undesirable. That's the message. Slice it, dice it,
mince around it, that's the intent.
As for GWM "seeking same": one rationalization is, of course, "I'm
attracted to white skin". I don't think, in my life, I've ever met a
gay man who consciously stated "I'm attracted to white skin". In fact,
usually when I have discussion with other white gay males, it is taken
for granted that "type" is "white", and that that white skin could be
considered unattractive isn't even a question. So, rationalization
that "I am attracted to white skin", on the part of Euro-descent men
is specious. The flip side of this is, of course, that black skin
/can/ be considered unattractive. I think about 25% of my gay friends
have, indeed, stated to me that they find black skin (or
African-American racial features) unattractive. I grant that that is
entirely possible, and can be true at the same time as the person is
not being overtly racist. I don't find willowy people attractive. I'm
not a willowist. The trick to the process is when those same people
say not only that they find blackness unattractive, but that it is
repulsive, or that never in their life could they imagine having sex
with a black man, or that they are shocked that I might. That's
clearly racism. How might that factor into GWM sks same?
No one is going to, in a public forum, state "I dislike black people"
in this day and age. It is very un-PC, and very unattractive. How
might someone get around it? They say "I like white people". They
state a sort of banality ("I like my own race"), for which an opposite
would be a rarity ("I dislike my race") in order to assert, what I
would claim, in reality, is that they dislike other races. It is a
socially acceptable way for stating a very socially unacceptable idea.
I'm lucky. My fetishes aren't that racially biased, though not many
men of Asian or African descent are hirsute, but a moustache is usally
enough to push that button on my libido adding-machine. I also grew up
with Japanese people in my rather lily-white family, my sister-in-law
is second-generation Japanese (my brother married her when I was 6),
and I've long known her parents (I also knew for a long time that they
had been interned in Manzinar, yet another layer of issues).
I'm lucky, I suppose, I can't imagine saying "GWM sks same" for
myself. I can imagine others, like me, who might, just might, write
such simply out of form, out of rote. A part of the personals system
is, in fact, patterning your messages to look like others to be
acceptable, to speak a similar language. The problem is the language
that is spoken in personals, the mechanism. The only personal I've
ever run was rather, well, dramatic, and got interesting responses. It
didn't have a lot to do with my looks, or at all with the looks of the
person I was asking for (except for minimum height/weight
requirements).
What is needed is not justification for a system which, with simple
scrutiny, can be shown to be rather racist, and clearly by people
within the community felt to be racist. What should be developed is a
new code of communication personals information, needs and offerings.
One can easily communicate that one likes slender pale 20-year-olds
without being offensive to husky ruddy 40-year-olds, or that one is
white and prefers the aerodynamic luster of a black man's skin to
freckled pink expanses, without simply chasing someone because they
are stereotypically "black". The shorthand needs to be developed.
--
US Jojo; damp, slighly soiled, but tasty nonetheless.
Roger B.A. Klorese
>I don't spend a lot of time around people who date Asians exclusively,
>so I'm not really bothered by the idea. Most of the people I've
>dated or had sex with tend to have very flexible tastes, race-wise.
>(Or maybe I'm just not "nice" enough to attract the traditional
>rice queen :-))
It's funny.
When I went out with Steve, people called me "rice queen" and decided I'd
be interested in every Asian guy around.
Now, friends are calling me a chicken hawk.
*Sigh*
--
ROGER B.A. KLORESE +1 415 ALL-ARFF
rog...@unpc.QueerNet.ORG {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!sgiblab!unpc!rogerk
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from."
-- J. Foster
J.T. Kittredge
>This is not to say that you can dictate on an individual level what is
>appropriate behavior, but to refuse to look at what might be going on
>on a personal level or more systemically under the excuse that's it's
>all "personal preference" is typical white-boy cluelessness.
What the man said.
-- JonTom
--
"I feel, my dear boy, my arm around you. I feel the pulsation,
thereby, as it were, of your excellent future and your admirable
endowment" -- Henry James to his protoge' Henrik Anderson
(as quoted by Fred Kaplan)
Mark Ryan Miller
In article <1993Jan8.1...@spdcc.com>, j...@spdcc.com (Joseph Francis) writes:
|>
|> I'm lucky. My fetishes aren't that racially biased, though not many
|> men of Asian or African descent are hirsute, but a moustache is usally
|> enough to push that button on my libido adding-machine. I also grew up
|> with Japanese people in my rather lily-white family, my sister-in-law
|> is second-generation Japanese (my brother married her when I was 6),
|> and I've long known her parents (I also knew for a long time that they
|> had been interned in Manzinar, yet another layer of issues).
|>
|> I'm lucky, I suppose, I can't imagine saying "GWM sks same" for
|> myself. I can imagine others, like me, who might, just might, write
--Mark
Robert Coren
I momentarily got this confused with another thread, and thought
"surely you know his middle initial is D?"
A Rice Queen
Hi all,
As someone with what other ppl would call a fetish towards a particular
race, here are my 0.02 worth on why I think it is not always racist to
date/post personal ads asking for a specific group.
Everybody is attracted by some features, physical or otherwise, towards
others. Let us concentrate on the physical aspects first. Some men find
hairy chests to be a turn-on, others blue eyes etc. I personally find
smooth skin, dark straight hair, dark eyes, high cheeks, lack of facial hair,
etc to be most attractive, and since *most*
East Asians satisfy these criteria, and conversely *most* ppl who satisfy these
criteria are East Asians, I concentrate my attention on East
Asians. If I were to post a personal ad, I would probably post something
like "GAMs have a better chance" because it would reduce my search space to ppl
I find attractive physically. Of course if there are ppl of other races who
also satisfy these physical characteristics, I will be more than happy
to hear from them too :)
That said, another other aspect is cultural. I also date East Asians because
I find them to be culturally closer to my upbringing and hence can
relate more to them. Of course this does not mean that I have shut myself
out to say American culture. I appreciate the differences and am always
willing to learn more and get more familiar with more diverse cultures.
Of course this does not mean that I will blindly go for any East Asian
just because he is East Asian. I will also see if we have things in common,
whether I like his personality, etc. So why not go for anybody who is
compatible personality-wise? I tried that, but found that my lust for
ppl "my physical type" was too distracting. What could be more perfect than
falling in love with somebody who has a great personality and is also
physically your type?
Also I think that say a GWM who is looking for GAMs only (for a relationship,
as opposed to sex only) can hardly be called racist as he is going for a race
other than his own and is expanding his horizons. Perhaps a
GI(ndian)M looking for another GIM maybe construed racist, but even
that depends on the individual case, and he may be looking for a GIM
because he is culturally more comfortable in having a GIM as a life-mate.
So, to conclude, while some of the GWM-see-GAM (or any other permutation)
maybe racist, not all are, and it needs to be considered on a case-by-case
basis rather than generalizing and categorizing all such ppl as being racist.
Regards,
Devesh
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Devesh S. Khatu \ / Office: 3OP3 #307
Strategic Technology Group \ / E-mail: dev...@bombay.oracle.com
Applications Division \ / Phone : (415) 506-4488
Oracle Corporation \/ Fax : (415) 506-7293
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
#define DISCLAIMER "I will be most surprised if my views match those of my
employer, or anyone else, or even myself"
Terry Bartlett
>It's funny.
>
>When I went out with Steve, people called me "rice queen" and decided I'd
>be interested in every Asian guy around.
It could have been worse, Roger. You could have gone out with me.
Then what would people have called you? :-(
>Now, friends are calling me a chicken hawk.
For some reason I get this image of little Henry Chicken Hawk chasing
after Foghorn Leghorn. . .the picture just doesn't fit. :-)
>*Sigh*
What you said.
>ROGER B.A. KLORESE +1 415 ALL-ARFF
Terry Bartlett bart...@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM
SunSoft, Inc. "You've got to stand for something
Rocky Mountain Technology Center or you'll fall for anything. . ."
Colorado Springs, CO
Goangshiuan Ying
>
>When I went out with Steve, people called me "rice queen" and decided I'd
>be interested in every Asian guy around.
>
Exactly.
"Rice queen" was the term I used a lot when I came out. I thought people
who interested in me must have been a 'rice queen'. I found myself searching
for 'rice queen' at the bars in Chicago, also at the Men's chorus I am singing
with. I even paid attention to those who had the 'rice queen' look. ( I sound
very desperate, right? :) ) However, more and more I found this '**** queen'
stuff very insulting. I found myself categorize people's preference and
it seemed there was no overlap between categories.
The idea of someone interests in me just because of I am Oriental turns me off.
Maybe I am just too serious about this, but I really think people should like
me as what I am, not the color of my skin or the shape of my eyes.
But of course, I have learned that people call themselves "**** queen" is
telling me what their perference are. I used to call myself "Potato queen"
but now I think I am more open to other 'options'. :) Maybe a curry queen?
Oh! Sometimes I would reply those "GWM seeks the same" ad. But I always
put on something like:
Oh! Well! Too Bad! You miss the chance to meet a great person.. :)
Just my two cents opinion. :)
Shawn
Randy Clark
If my message seems too redundant, I apologize.
I've accidentally killed some of the followups,
though some of the ones I've seen have made
good and interesting points.
In article <1993Jan6.0...@athena.mit.edu> s...@athena.mit.edu
(Tigua Alan Naghel Jackson) writes:
>I recently found myself attracted to a white guy, which isn't unusual
>since I don't limit myself to any race. But being a man of color, black
>with a little French and Native American, I'm constantly forced to
>consider the implications of dating someone white. I should say, it's more
>that being a black American I am forced to consider the implications
>of dating a white. Particularly, the prime question is: is he
>dating me because I'm black?
Everyone seems to agree this is a tough question,
and I feel myself right in the middle of it.
Like you, I don't limit myself to or against any
race/ethnic group, nor would I want to do so.
(I suspect that -- as Greg Parkinson says of himself
-- that I *am* more limited by class and culture
than I would prefer.)
On the other hand, my tendency to prefer almost
any type *but* fair-haired white types is so well
known in soc.motss circles that this reputation,
to my bemusement, preceded me to Amsterdam last summer.
So as it happens, I *have* been in the position of
asking myself if I am going for someone because of
their racial/ethnic background. I have to admit
that, like other aspects of physical appearance, this
can be a factor in initial attraction.
The further question becomes, am I then being
exploitative? I don't believe I am, because if
someone doesn't also engage me personally as
well, I will lose interest just as readily
in a matter of minutes.
Unless, of course, the two of us are feeling
mutually trashy. But that's a consensual act.
>
>This is all secondary, though, to the reason why I'm posting in the first
>place which is for white men to consider: When placing an ad why say,
>'GWM seeks same, no fats no fems' when what you mean to say is,
>'GWM seeks <whatever> no colored, no fats, no fems...'?
>
>Of course, my version is 'racist.' But I'm the only one saying that...
>
>Because denial does nothing...
>I think that an admission of the true state of affairs in your mind set
>can only weaken the huge racial barrier that exists within the gay community.
For those of whom what you say is true, I agree
with you.
As someone of whom nearly the opposite is true, and
thus a member of a group that *also* evokes discomfort
among many readers from this group, all I can really
say is that being objectified can be a most uncomfortable
feeling (with which I'm also familiar!), but that I think
there's a component of objectification in any attraction.
My favorite exchange along these lines:
Feminist friend: "I just don't consider physical
appearance."
Me (who has seen her behave otherwise): "Even if
they have no butt?"
Friend: "That would be a problem."
>
>I'm not interested in any responses although that's not to say that
>I won't entertain them...
>I just wanted to bring something to attention for personal reflection.
>
>tigua
My parting thought is that personals are, after all,
advertisements, and therefore mostly pretentious hype
no matter who writes them. There are exceptions, of
course, and there are those -- or trends among them --
that point to some serious, even nasty issues among us,
as you pointed out very well.
-R
--
Randy Clark {}!autodesk.com!randyc
"Whose mind is it that doesn't suffer a loud takeover
once in a while?" -- Maxine Hong Kingston
David O'Donnell
>We've discussed the question of G?M seeks same before on MOTSS,
>without any sort of resolution (as though resolution is possible) and
>I thought about it for more than my usual 10 seconds before replying.
>It seems that there are several convergent reasons for the application
>(G?M seeks same). To generalize, I feel that the problem is a part of
>the system itself, and not the people. Since divergent views can arrive
>at racist overtones, it is a problem of mechanism rather than intent.
YES! YES! YES! (I feel like a clip from "When Harry Met Sally")
I have, in my "life", put out four personals. They all, to one degree or
another, said something to the effect of: 'If you're someone who finds
"no fats/fems" or "Blonde/Blue" or "Young and Hung" to be a necessary
requirement, then I don't want you. But if you *are* looking for someone
who you can have an intelligent conversation with, laugh with, share some
time -- good AND bad -- with, then I'd like to hear from you.' I met one
very nice man (who I will admit upfront was in many respects not "the
perfect type" for me) this way, and I really enjoyed the times we spent
together. All the other replies have been through e-mail and have equally
produced intelligent, enjoyable, wonderfully REAL people to get to know.
--Dave O'Donnell
atr...@netlab.cis.brown.edu
Opinions: What we all have but wish others didn't.
David O'Donnell
> What is this? Now we're not allowed to have preferences any more?
No one's suggested this. There is a difference between a preference and
blatant, hurt-engendering discrimination.
--Dave O'Donnell
atr...@netlab.cis.brown.edu
In Search Of: Witty .sig
Steve Dyer
>In article <C0JtB...@queernet.org> rog...@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
>>When I went out with Steve, people called me "rice queen" and decided I'd
>>be interested in every Asian guy around.
>
>It could have been worse, Roger. You could have gone out with me.
>Then what would people have called you? :-(
Either fucking lucky or lucky fucking...
Caroline Jean Lee
>Thank you, Caroline. I have one, question, though; is it wrong for
>someone to have been initially attracted to you because of your
>race and the connotations it has been given if they have since found
>other, more substantial reasons to love you, and your race is no
>longer the factor it once was? How does being attracted to someone
>for their race differ from being attracted to someone for other
>physical features?
I am not sure "wrong" and "right" are the terms I've been thinking in
here, so this may be a roundabout answer to your question:
The difference for me, between being attracted to someone for their
race and being attracted to them for, say their mustache or their
bubble butt, is that race carries a lot of associations, stereotypes,
and other baggage that many other physical features do not. Race is a
loaded category in our society.
You speak of someone being attracted to me becuase of my race and
because of its connotations. Let's run through some of the
better-known connotations of "Asianness" here: Exotic, Other, Passive,
Flower/Blossom, traditional obedient female (rather than liberated
feminist), or, in the case of gay men, submissive. Not going to be
rebellious--the model minority, after all.
When a person makes assumptions about me based on my race, and associations
that they carry about my race, I find it demeaning and hurtful, and yes,
it's racist. It's true that they can work past the baggage that they carry,
but personally, I don't care to help them work through it, not as a lover
at least.
The other possibility is that I will be seen as some kind of cultural
resource for people who are "really into" Asian cultures and the
"exoticism" of it, and that they will try to use me to immerse
themselves in it because they think it's cool. More generally, there
are white people who are into people of color and the cultures of
people of color, and try to use people of color to "colorize" their
lives--put a little or a lot of ethnic "spice" in their lives. I
think this is just as objectifying.
Caroline
Roger Phillips
atr...@netlab.cis.brown.edu (David O'Donnell) writes:
> I have, in my "life", put out four personals.
> They all, to one degree or another, said something to the effect of:
> 'If you're someone who finds "no fats/fems" or "Blonde/Blue" or
> "Young and Hung" to be a necessary requirement, then I don't want you.
> But if you *are* looking for someone who you can have an intelligent
> conversation with, laugh with, share some time -- good AND bad --
> with, then I'd like to hear from you.'
Presumably, you weren't interested in grammar queens, then? :-)
--
Roger Phillips ro...@quantime.co.uk
"*crib-biting* in horses, a vicious habit of biting the manger, etc.,
and swallowing air" -- Chambers English Dictionary (1988)
Steve Dyer
>I am not sure "wrong" and "right" are the terms I've been thinking in
>here, so this may be a roundabout answer to your question:
>The difference for me, between being attracted to someone for their
>race and being attracted to them for, say their mustache or their
>bubble butt, is that race carries a lot of associations, stereotypes,
>and other baggage that many other physical features do not. Race is a
Fantastic article!
Bird Rendell H.
>It could have been worse, Roger. You could have gone out with me.
>Then what would people have called you? :-(
The luckiest man on the face of this wretched planet!
Sincerely,
Rendell
p.s. Yes, Virginia, that was an e-flirt.
S. Spencer Sun
>Thank you, Caroline. I have one, question, though; is it wrong for
>someone to have been initially attracted to you because of your
>race and the connotations it has been given if they have since found
>other, more substantial reasons to love you, and your race is no
>longer the factor it once was? How does being attracted to someone
>for their race differ from being attracted to someone for other
>physical features?
This, along with Caroline's followup, have been thought-provoking,
adding to the inordinate amount of introspection I've been doing lately
(this is NOT a good thing when you get back to school on the 3rd, having
a CS project due the 8th, one the 11th, one the 12th, and a paper due on
the 12th as well).
Other people have already mentioned this idea in this thread, but to
restate it:
Is it "wrong" (well, I suppose that translates into "What do you think
about..." since right/wrong may not be good words to describe it) to
find someone physically attractive and then try to become friends with
them for that reason? Even if you do end up becoming friends with them,
isn't there a possibility that they'll really be hurt if they find out
you wanted to be friends because you found them attractive? Sort of
using them in a way.
I wonder about this, because I've come close on two occasions to doing
this, namely finding attraction first and friendship second. Although
in the first case I'm certain it was friendship first, then later
discovery of attraction, and in the second case it's hard to tell
because it's been sort of simultaneous. Sigh.
Friend #1 is pretty supportive, but straight (His exact words were
"Well, I think I'm going to try the heterosexual thing first. But
thanks for being honest."). Friend #2 and I don't know each other as
well, and I haven't told him yet (neither about being gay nor about
being attracted to him), and I'm not really sure how it would go if he
found out. Will be exploring that next time I'm home...
-----
sss / Princeton University Class of 1994 / Department of Computer Science
Horror? Steckle, it's ignorance we fear. Since when did truth and
knowledge become a horror? [_Flatliners_]
John Dorrance
>In article <thaaang.726492026@cwis> tha...@cwis.unomaha.edu (John Dorrance) writes:
>>Thank you, Caroline. I have one, question, though; is it wrong for
>>someone to have been initially attracted to you because of your
>>race and the connotations it has been given if they have since found
>>other, more substantial reasons to love you, and your race is no
>>longer the factor it once was? How does being attracted to someone
>>for their race differ from being attracted to someone for other
>>physical features?
>I am not sure "wrong" and "right" are the terms I've been thinking in
>here, so this may be a roundabout answer to your question:
>The difference for me, between being attracted to someone for their
>race and being attracted to them for, say their mustache or their
>bubble butt, is that race carries a lot of associations, stereotypes,
>and other baggage that many other physical features do not. Race is a
>loaded category in our society.
Agreed. But then, when you listen to someone talk about large appendages
or facial hair or bubble butts, you may find that such things also carry
a lot of baggage. Big dicks mean power and things like that, facial hair
means virility and 'manliness', etc. So how do such preconceptions differ
from those held about race?
>You speak of someone being attracted to me becuase of my race and
>because of its connotations. Let's run through some of the
>better-known connotations of "Asianness" here: Exotic, Other, Passive,
>Flower/Blossom, traditional obedient female (rather than liberated
>feminist), or, in the case of gay men, submissive. Not going to be
>rebellious--the model minority, after all.
Yes. But what if, when someone first sees you, they have all that
stuff called up, but in their very first conversation with you all
of these things (which they knew weren't realistic anyway) are
dispelled and they can continue getting to know you as a person,
rather than as an Asian? I'm not saying that there aren't cases
where this kind of stereotyping will happen, because there are
lots of stupid people, but... Is it wrong for someone to know the
societally-endowed notions about a race if they know it's all bull?
Is it possible for someone to discount them?
>When a person makes assumptions about me based on my race, and associations
>that they carry about my race, I find it demeaning and hurtful, and yes,
>it's racist. It's true that they can work past the baggage that they carry,
>but personally, I don't care to help them work through it, not as a lover
>at least.
I agree that it's racist to take stock in class generalizations, but
I don't think it's so pervasive that interracial relationships are
greatly disadvantaged because of it.
>The other possibility is that I will be seen as some kind of cultural
>resource for people who are "really into" Asian cultures and the
>"exoticism" of it, and that they will try to use me to immerse
>themselves in it because they think it's cool. More generally, there
>are white people who are into people of color and the cultures of
>people of color, and try to use people of color to "colorize" their
>lives--put a little or a lot of ethnic "spice" in their lives. I
>think this is just as objectifying.
I agree that if someone were to use you for their Orogami fix or
something it would be pretty dehumanizing, but what if you were
friends anyway, and sometimes discussed Asian culture simply
because it was a subject that both of you were interested in? Is
that wrong?
And please, have some pity! American culture is all about Big Macs
and pollution. Can you blame a white person for looking for some-
thing more interesting?
John Dorrance
stuff that I suspect might sound *really* clueless:
>cj...@netcom.com (Caroline Jean Lee) writes:
>>The difference for me, between being attracted to someone for their
>>race and being attracted to them for, say their mustache or their
>>bubble butt, is that race carries a lot of associations, stereotypes,
>>and other baggage that many other physical features do not. Race is a
>>loaded category in our society.
>Agreed. But then, when you listen to someone talk about large appendages
>or facial hair or bubble butts, you may find that such things also carry
>a lot of baggage. Big dicks mean power and things like that, facial hair
>means virility and 'manliness', etc. So how do such preconceptions differ
>from those held about race?
I know that race is a lot more personal than other things. I'm just
saying that people can be just as objectified for other physical
characteristics - so much that their humanity takes a back seat to
their <insert whatever here>-edness. Just remember that people can
be idealized for *lots* of irrelevant physical reasons, and that
*what* people are typifying you for is not as important as the fact
that they *are* typifying you.
>>You speak of someone being attracted to me becuase of my race and
>>because of its connotations. Let's run through some of the
>>better-known connotations of "Asianness" here: Exotic, Other, Passive,
>>Flower/Blossom, traditional obedient female (rather than liberated
>>feminist), or, in the case of gay men, submissive. Not going to be
>>rebellious--the model minority, after all.
>Yes. But what if, when someone first sees you, they have all that
>stuff called up, but in their very first conversation with you all
>of these things (which they knew weren't realistic anyway) are
>dispelled and they can continue getting to know you as a person,
>rather than as an Asian? I'm not saying that there aren't cases
>where this kind of stereotyping will happen, because there are
>lots of stupid people, but... Is it wrong for someone to know the
>societally-endowed notions about a race if they know it's all bull?
>Is it possible for someone to discount them?
And what if someone is attracted to your Asian-ness not for the
cultural baggage it carries, but because of the physical type it
generally describes (slighter in build, darker skin, black hair,
eye shape)? Is that any worse than liking blondes with big boobs?
Jess Anderson
(John Dorrance), trying hard to have serious discussion
about important matters, writes:
>Is that any worse than liking blondes with big boobs?
Well, Jojo *is* very popular, for good reasons.
--
[Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin]
[Internet: ande...@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson]
[Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888]
[---------> Discrimination, Bigotry, and Hate are not Family Values <---------]
Gary Byma
Anderson) said:
>
>In article <thaaang.726635080@cwis> tha...@cwis.unomaha.edu
>(John Dorrance), trying hard to have serious discussion
>about important matters, writes:
>
>>Is that any worse than liking blondes with big boobs?
>
>Well, Jojo *is* very popular, for good reasons.
>
Gary Byma
Person in flux
>
>The other possibility is that I will be seen as some kind of cultural
>resource for people who are "really into" Asian cultures and the
>"exoticism" of it, and that they will try to use me to immerse
>themselves in it because they think it's cool. More generally, there
>are white people who are into people of color and the cultures of
>people of color, and try to use people of color to "colorize" their
>lives--put a little or a lot of ethnic "spice" in their lives. I
>think this is just as objectifying.
This particular point interests me greatly because I have
seen it happen with deaf people and hearing people who wish
to learn sign language. There's an unspoken (used to be
explicit, but now it's not P.C.) "rule" that the best way to
learn sign language is to take a deaf lover. Whether or not
this is true ignores the very real possibility that the love
relationship is somewhat exploitative. And the possibility
is compounded by the social imbalance between the two
partners; rightly or wrongly, deaf people aren't always (to
put it mildly) viewed as being capable talented individuals,
and hearing people involved with deaf lovers often are viewed
as having savior complexes.
The most successful "mixed" relationships I've seen have
followed their own paths and ignored social conventions.
Katie
Jeff Dauber
|> In article <C0JtB...@queernet.org> rog...@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
|> >When I went out with Steve, people called me "rice queen" and decided I'd
|> >be interested in every Asian guy around.
|>
|> It could have been worse, Roger. You could have gone out with me.
|> Then what would people have called you? :-(
Very very fortunate.
FWA
Terry Bartlett
>In article <1993Jan8.2...@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM> bart...@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM (Terry Bartlett) writes:
>>In article <C0JtB...@queernet.org> rog...@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
>>>When I went out with Steve, people called me "rice queen" and decided I'd
>>>be interested in every Asian guy around.
>>
>>It could have been worse, Roger. You could have gone out with me.
>>Then what would people have called you? :-(
>
>Either fucking lucky or lucky fucking...
Well, thanks for the compliments, guys.
The point I was trying to make was about the slang terms we use to
refer to people who, for whatever reason, choose to date people of
color. (or whatever term you want to use) What does it say about
an issue when the terms used are "rice queen", "salsa queen" and
"dinge queen"? Can you honestly say people who use such terms
aren't making some sort of value judgement?
I don't think the term for minorites who date whites, "snow queen",
carries these same connotations. I'm fairly sensitive to how
language is used, and the slang terms alone speak volumes.
>Steve Dyer
>dy...@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Gene W. Smith
abe...@godel.questor.wimsey.bc.ca writes:
>"GWM seeks same" is more likely motivated by straighforward physical
>turnons than any latent antipathy towards blacks. I wouldn't take offense
>at it, nor would I shy away from anyone who was attracted to *because* of
>your race.
No matter what race you belong to, this is a possibility.
My first lover was black, and made no secret of his fascination for
my skin color, and even quizzed me on the genetic mix (half Swedish,
half English) which led to it. He ended up moving to Sweden.
In Canada I saw a lot of someone who is, alas, still in Canada. He is
Chinese, but is not attracted to Asian men, only white and (to some
extent) black men.
None of this strikes me as either insulting or especially unusual, _de
gustibus_ and all that. What I think is funny is that at various
times people have commented on my supposed specialization in younger
men, older men, black men, and Oriental men, depending on the current
version of Mr. Right. Whatever you do, someone will think it is a
specialty of the house.
--
Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/IWR/Ruprecht-Karls University
gsm...@kalliope.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de
Dominick V. Zurlo
While I don't wnat to downplay the feelings of being objectified and
desired because of one's ethnic background, I think there is a big
difference between one's preferences and one's prejudices (bigotry).
For example, I prefer men with darker skin, but not black skinned.
WHy, because this is what I grew up with, and it is what has been
impressed upon me that this is the more ideal "shade" for me to
pair up with. However, that doesn't mean I am not attracted to
people with either white skin or black skin. In fact,in practice,
it is just the opposite. While many of the people I have dated/
slept with have been of a more "dusky" appearance, it seems that
people still assume I prefer "white" over other shades because they
percieve me to be white. Wrong! I am Italian, and have only a slight
olive tone to my skin, and am often mistaken for caucasian, however,
I am no more caucasian than my Castillian Hispanic friends who classify
me as such. One friend, rey, is Castillian, and whiter than a ghost.
My first lover is Hispanic, but not Castillian, and has fairly "naturally-
tanned" skin. I don't find Rey attractive sexually, but I still find
my ex very attractive (as a friend as well, FYI). I have dated people
of all colors, with the exception of Asian-American, most likely due to
the fact that in New Mexico there aren't very many Orientals around.
ALthough, while in High School, I did date a female friend who was
Hindu and had very dark skin, that I found very attractive, although,
her being a woman didn't turn me on sexually.
As it turns out, my lover has very white skin, but that doesn't stop me
from loving him. My preference remains.
I think the distinguishing line between one having a preference and
a prejudice in this case is when you stop looking past your
physical preferences to see others who may not fit immediately into
them. In other words, when you reject people for not fitting your
imagined mold.
You could say I'm attracted to Hispanic men as a race, but I'm not, I'm
attracted to the features. Features which tend to be apparent in many
different "races" from Italian to Hispanic to Arabic (I find many Turkish
men, for example, very attractive) to African to caucasian. For me, I'm
much more attracted by attitude, intelligence, and emotions.
******************************************************************
* Flapjack * "Yes, I'm bi, - *
* B7/8 f+ w (c+d)v g++ k+(+)v
* s(-/+)v m e r(=) * both top and bottom." *
*******************************************************************
Steve Dyer
>The point I was trying to make was about the slang terms we use to
>refer to people who, for whatever reason, choose to date people of
>color. (or whatever term you want to use) What does it say about
>an issue when the terms used are "rice queen", "salsa queen" and
>"dinge queen"? Can you honestly say people who use such terms
>aren't making some sort of value judgement?
Well, you're absolutely right, of course.
>I don't think the term for minorites who date whites, "snow queen",
>carries these same connotations. I'm fairly sensitive to how
>language is used, and the slang terms alone speak volumes.
Plus, it's hard to be insulted by a word which identifies you as part
of the majority, if you are part of the majority. That doesn't stop
most majorities (usually white people) from attempting this: peek in
rec.arts.books where a discussion of CO:9 (don't ask what this is doing
in r.a.b) turns into how awful it is to use the phrase "white Protestant
het boy" to describe people who "don't get it" when issues around civil
rights are brought up.
--
Chris Black
|>>It's funny.
|>>
|>>When I went out with Steve, people called me "rice queen" and decided I'd
|>>be interested in every Asian guy around.
|>
|>It could have been worse, Roger. You could have gone out with me.
|>Then what would people have called you? :-(
Lucky, of course!
-- Chris
bl...@sybase.com
William Hsu
>
> The difference for me, between being attracted to someone for their
> race and being attracted to them for, say their mustache or their
> bubble butt, is that race carries a lot of associations, stereotypes,
> and other baggage that many other physical features do not. Race is a
> loaded category in our society.
Well-put. And good article in general.
What is important to me is whether I'm forced into certain stereotypical
roles in relationships or social situations, because of my race. When
that happens, it's time to think about walking out.
But it's not easy to separate race-based characteristics from non-race
-based physical characteristics, cultural characteristics etc. Just last
night I was talking with a friend's Mexican artist boyfriend about Frida
Kahlo and light in Chinese painting (of which I know very little) and
traditional brush techniques in Chinese calligraphy (which I know
something of). Now if we were trying to pick each other up, we probably
would have been talking about the same things, but it wouldn't be as
if I *expect* him to tell me all about Kahlo, or he expects any Asian
to tell him all about Chinese calligraphy.
Bill, who had a date with a boy he thought is part-Japanese, but it
turned out he is Irish/Polish, and they ended up talking about Butoh
anyway
Karen Kenny aka Mel
>
> I guess I am a clueless fuck.
oooh, my sympathies to all your partners then! I tend to
avoid clueless fucks as much as possible. "Go get a clue,
honey, and then look me up."
Does this kind of advertising work with men? I must say
that this wouldn't go far in the lesbian world.
Karen
+======================================================+
Karen S. Kenny
"Of course, you silly things!" kke...@gems.vcu.edu
Medical College of VA
Richmond, VA
+======================================================+
Joseph Francis
>>It's funny.
>>
>>When I went out with Steve, people called me "rice queen" and decided I'd
>>be interested in every Asian guy around.
>
>It could have been worse, Roger. You could have gone out with me.
>Then what would people have called you? :-(
A Terry Queen?
>>Now, friends are calling me a chicken hawk.
>For some reason I get this image of little Henry Chicken Hawk chasing
>after Foghorn Leghorn. . .the picture just doesn't fit. :-)
>>*Sigh*
>What you said.
I wish people would call me something. I don't seem to fit any queen
categories.
--
US Jojo; damp, slighly soiled, but tasty nonetheless.
Joseph Francis
Well, the truth is, however, that taking on a lover who speaks a
different language is the best way to learn that language. I had an
affair with a married Frenchman for a year and that got me a big
jumpstart in speaking French. I didn't consciously find someone who
spoke a bit of english and good French, but it worked out that way,
for any number of reasons. They also enjoyed, I think, being the
pedagogue. I don't think it is bad to have an imbalance, or to even
use an imbalance for advantage, when all are agreed. It goes back to
my music analogy.
One problem in this discussion is that it avoids entirely the question
of Status. When we say 'white person' in discussing race, vis-a-vis
'oriental person', 'black person', 'person of color', one says very
different things depending upon context. I think sometimes oriental or
white people may be sought for 'status' reasons, rather than ethnic
reasons, 'ethnic spice'. Most heterosexual bonding operates along the
lines of status, and that can hardly be avoided in a similar gay
situation - long we have heard that men marry down, women marry up. It
is very, very hard to get away from this. What happens is that gay men
who put themselves on the 'woman marrying' end of an appropriate
heterosexual model will be looking to marry up, and see high-status
mates; and so on for lesbians, bisexuals. (I think this is another
factor in why it is useful to not perpetuate heterosexual models of
mating.) Status inequity between non-white and white lesbigay people
is probably a stronger driving force than racism in perpetuating 'GWM
seeks same' reasoning, and for same-race pairing in general.
Status is very tricky to speak about in America; everyone pretends it
doesn't exist, or that it is ugly to talk about.
Jack Hamilton
writes:
>I wish people would call me something. I don't seem to fit any queen
>categories.
No, you seem to fit *all* the queen categories. It's like the difference
between black and white.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton j...@netcom.com P. O. Box 281107 SF, CA 94128-1107
Steve Dyer
>categories.
Someone whose name I will carry to the grave lovingly described you to me
(before we'd met) as a "smurf bear". :-)
Jess Anderson
(Steve Dyer) writes:
>In article <1993Jan13....@spdcc.com> j...@spdcc.com
>(Joseph Francis) writes:
>>I wish people would call me something. I don't seem to fit any queen
>>categories.
>Someone whose name I will carry to the grave lovingly described you to me
>(before we'd met) as a "smurf bear". :-)
I had been trying to think of a somewhat tart reply (as is
my wont), but really, this does fit the bill quite nicely.
I think it's the puckish smile that does it.
Donald Andrew Agarrat
In article <1993Jan13....@spdcc.com> j...@spdcc.com
(Joseph Francis) exudes:
} Status inequity between non-white and white lesbigay people
} is probably a stronger driving force than racism in
} perpetuating 'GWM seeks same' reasoning, and for same-race
} pairing in general. Status is very tricky to speak about in
} America; everyone pretends it doesn't exist, or that it is
} ugly to talk about.
Futhermore, there is no equity between 'GWM seeks same'
reasoning and 'BWM seeks same' reasoning. The former is
"normal", the latter is considered militant by both Blacks and
Whites.
In fact, my ex-lover keeps assuring me that I need to have the
conformation of a White person, therefore I'll be stuck with (in
his words) "some ugly patronizing Jewish liberal with no
intelligence" and that because I have racial identity problems,
a Black man will never satisfy me. I'll always want more ...
Yeah, I'd say that sounds just like me ...
Donald
It's gonna be a lovely day for you and me. Just wait and see.
Rod Williams
>Futhermore, there is no equity between 'GWM seeks same'
>reasoning and 'BWM seeks same' reasoning. The former is
>"normal", the latter is considered militant by both Blacks and
>Whites.
It is? (I'm presuming you really meant 'GBM'?). Both of
them suggest to me something stunted about the advertiser,
though I'd expect the former to be from ignorance and the
latter to be from experience.
>In fact, my ex-lover keeps assuring me that I need to have the
>conformation of a White person, therefore I'll be stuck with (in
>his words) "some ugly patronizing Jewish liberal with no
>intelligence" and that because I have racial identity problems,
>a Black man will never satisfy me. I'll always want more ...
>
>Yeah, I'd say that sounds just like me ...
I'd say that sounds just like you're lucky he's an ex-
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
rod williams -=- pacific bell -=- san ramon, ca -=- rjw...@pacbell.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terrance Heath
The volume of this newgroups has kept me from jumping into
most threads lately, but I couldn't stay out of this one.
I've had some experience being on both sides of the
race-fetish issue, sort of. It's an unsettling thing to lie in bed
with a man who looks at one's penis and says "I guess its true what
they say about black men", particularly when it seems that the sole
purpose of his pursuit was to get to that "black dick". It's another
thing to be told bye a man one is pursuing that "I don't do black
guys."
The whole mess had made me more and more suspicious of some
white gay men, particularly those who display an interest in me,
because I've no real way of knowing what there interests really are.
Even if its someone I've known for a while, I've discovered that its
easy to know a person for a while and not know just how racist they
are deep down.
Now, some will argue that a guy isn't racist just because he
says he doesn't "do" black men. From the other side, I'm not so sure
what else to call it, since I go away feeling that I've been rejected
solely on the basis of my race. That seems to be all that was used to
make the judgment, so what else is it but racism when you judge people
by the color of thier skin?
I won't even go into the whole mess about those personals that
read "GWM seeks GBM", except to say I find it best to stay away from
them too because it may just be a case of a guy wanting to have a
black fling and then forget it. I've had the experience of being htly
pursued by one such fair-haired gay man who made no secret of he
gayness or his othr partners, but afterwards flatly denied that we had
even had sex and does so to this date.
Anyway, this is probably one of the things that frustrates me
most about the gay male community, particularly here in the south
where most of our southern belles are deathly allergic to chocolate,
and most gay men of color aren't merely closeted, they're in the
shoeox under the floorboards in the closet. After a while, it makes a
lot more sense to just take the phone off the hook, lock the door,
stay home and watch television.
--
"Black men loving black men is THE revolutionary act!"
-Joseph Beam_
Terrance Heath
he...@athena.cs.uga.edu
Jess Anderson
In article <1993Jan13.2...@wam.umd.edu>
lov...@wam.umd.edu (Donald Andrew Agarrat) writes:
>Hi everybody! *goofy smile radiating ignorant bliss*
But it's cute, nonetheless. My nickname when I was a kid
was Smiley. Smiles are a Real Good Thing (tm), I think.
>In article <1993Jan13....@spdcc.com> j...@spdcc.com
>(Joseph Francis) exudes:
>>Status inequity between non-white and white lesbigay people
>>is probably a stronger driving force than racism in
>>perpetuating 'GWM seeks same' reasoning, and for same-race
>>pairing in general.
I'm not sure I follow the distinction being drawn here,
given what I see as the intertwinings of status inequities
with racism.
>>Status is very tricky to speak about in America; everyone
>>pretends it doesn't exist, or that it is ugly to talk about.
Seems to me it may *be* ugly to talk about, and you're sure
right people seem to want to pretend it isn't there. It's
maybe not overstating to claim that most people are better
at truth-avoiding than at truth-seeking.
>Futhermore, there is no equity between 'GWM seeks same'
>reasoning and 'BWM seeks same' reasoning.
Someone else pointed out that you probably intended GBM,
rather than BWM, but in light of your friend's criticism,
maybe it was a kind of Freudian slip.
>The former is "normal", the latter is considered militant by
>both Blacks and Whites.
At first I was rather surprised by the second part of this
(I've always been repelled by the first part), that blacks
might see a same-race solicitation as militant. Maybe you
could spin that out a bit. Is it somehow related to Black
Pride, Black Power issues, or separatism, or what? Is it
clear what I'm asking? Why would it be seen as militant for
one black person to want to be with another?
>In fact, my ex-lover keeps assuring me that I need to have
>the conformation of a White person,
Ah yes, well *that's* a complex subject, all right. But
because of what you say next about this ex-, it sounds like
he wanted to club you over the head with it, whatever
element of truth there is or isn't in it.
>therefore I'll be stuck with (in his words) "some ugly
>patronizing Jewish liberal with no intelligence"
Pretty nasty mouth, that fellow, sounds like to me.
>and that because I have racial identity problems, a Black
>man will never satisfy me.
Did you have a response to that? If so, I'd be interested
to know what it is, unless you feel it's too private.
>I'll always want more ...
As one of the all-time classic exponents of the "if some
is good, more is better" theory (with but a few exceptions),
always wanting more seems perfectly all right to me, as
long as not getting more doesn't become too discouraging.
>Yeah, I'd say that sounds just like me ...
I'm glad you're here, Donald.
<> You never know what is enough until you know what is more
<> than enough. -- William Blake
Donald Andrew Agarrat
} (I'm presuming you really meant 'GBM'?).
You're absolutely right ... (God, what was I thinking?)
*slaps himself*
Donald
FJ!!
>I wish people would call me something. I don't seem to fit any queen
>categories.
Coming from someone who knows so much about style and styling, and who
has declared here once or twice that you've got to work with what
you've got to look like you want to be, I find this comments
somewhat... ummmm... not believable.
Besides, girlfriend, you enjoy the mindfuck you're handing out too much.
FJ!!
Jess Anderson
In article <C0up9...@athena.cs.uga.edu>
he...@athena.cs.uga.edu (Terrance Heath) writes:
>The whole mess had made me more and more suspicious of some
>white gay men, particularly those who display an interest in
>me, because I've no real way of knowing what their interests
>really are.
I think this problem generalizes, to a fair degree.
Whatever it may be -- the examples in your posting point to
some of the most unfortunate manifestations -- it seems that
there's something out there in the social environment that
stimulates and reinforces a pattern of guarding one's
vulnerabilities. Or, maybe, of having to. For whatever
reason, the results seem very often to be significant
barriers to intimacy.
Over the years, when one might think greater experience and
self-confidence would tend to diminish such concerns, I've
found myself becoming more cautious, not less so, where
matters of heart are concerned. This is not to say I've
been especially timid, though I think of myself as being on
the shy side, and there have been numerous times when I
threw caution to the winds (not since 1982, I hasten to
add). But I think I'm considerably more guarded now than I
ever was as a younger person, the more so where my innermost
feelings are concerned.
Indeed, to me, loving always involved feelings of
self-abandon or self-transcendence, to some degree. On the
whole, I've been very fortunate about all this, but my point
here is that a reserve connected with the other person's
intentions has very nearly always been a factor.
>Even if its someone I've known for a while, I've discovered
>that its easy to know a person for a while and not know just
>how racist they are deep down.
Oh yes, this can be a terrible disappointment. There used
to be a guy where I work who was gay, and we got along
pretty well, though there was never any romantic
involvement. We socialized together in and out of work. I'd
known him some years and had a generally high regard for
him. Then one day, as though it were totally routine (for
him I guess it was), he let fly an incredible stream of
racist filth, right into my face (it happened to be
anti-Asian racism). I had to continue to deal with him
professionally, but the friendship and socializing ended
right there.
>I've had the experience of being hotly pursued by one such
>fair-haired gay man who made no secret of he gayness or his
>other partners, but afterwards flatly denied that we had even
>had sex and does so to this date.
It must be especially galling. I've known something similar
to happen when the other person was straight, bi, or
crypto-gay too. Been there, hated it.
(I want to take up another theme in the same posting,
Terrance, but separately from this.)
<> There's no limit to how complicated things can get,
<> on account of one thing always leading to another.
<> -- E.B. White
Jess Anderson
>Anyway, this is probably one of the things that frustrates
>me most about the gay male community, particularly here in
>the south where most of our southern belles are deathly
>allergic to chocolate, and most gay men of color aren't
>merely closeted, they're in the shoebox under the
>floorboards in the closet. After a while, it makes a lot
>more sense to just take the phone off the hook, lock the
>door, stay home and watch television.
How can one account for this apparently greater reluctance
to come out? I've read a little about this, where I've seen
mentioned the influence of the church, the idea that
homosexuality is a "white abberation," and things of that
sort. More recently (in connection with Thomas/Hill), I've
read of the influence of prevailing attitudes affecting the
relationships between men and women of color, attitudes
*within* the community. The stuff I've read suggests that
African-American lesbians have in some ways found it easier
to come out than the gay African-American men have.
One of my interior themes has been barriers to intimacy, and
I wonder what you would see as barriers unique to being a
black gay man, especially if staying home and watching
television is not really what you want to do with your life.
Randy Clark
>race-fetish issue, sort of. It's an unsettling thing to lie in bed
>with a man who looks at one's penis and says "I guess its true what
I think you just violated the Squirrel Rule
about self revelations in this newsgroup. :-)
But on the serious side of what you're saying,
I can well imagine the awkwardness, difficulty,
and even degrading aspect of these situations.
No one should have to go through them, but of
course they do happen.
I have no general, all-purpose solutions.
I wish someone did.
> The whole mess had made me more and more suspicious of some
>white gay men, particularly those who display an interest in me,
>because I've no real way of knowing what there interests really are.
Once burned ...
Whether it's racism or just
general manipulation/objectification, I'm at a
point right now where, like you, I'm generally
suspicious of displays of interest, unless the
person in question is already someone I know
(and like). I wish it weren't that way
What I'm trying to say here, I guess, is that your
experience generalizes beyond the race question in
some ways.
>Even if its someone I've known for a while, I've discovered that its
>easy to know a person for a while and not know just how racist they
>are deep down.
Since in many circles it's no longer publically acceptable
to say bigoted things, it's become more difficult to know
where people's heads are. Like Jess and you, I've been
rudely shocked by some people.
Too, it's difficult -- if not impossible -- to grow up
in this country without absorbing some attitudes that
are, after all, institutionalized in our society.
I wouldn't claim to be completely free of racism
-- I would only claim that I don't like it, and I
try to overcome it and to resist it in others.
> Anyway, this is probably one of the things that frustrates me
>most about the gay male community, particularly here in the south
>where most of our southern belles are deathly allergic to chocolate,
>and most gay men of color aren't merely closeted, they're in the
>shoeox under the floorboards in the closet.
What a turn of phrase! I got a (sad) chuckle out
of this.
You're right about these things varying regionally.
Here in SF, I encounter black/white racism only
infrequently -- and then, most often from people from
other parts of the States. However, anti-East-Asian
racism is common and often quite open. It's pretty
disgusting. Nowhere's perfect.
>After a while, it makes a
>lot more sense to just take the phone off the hook, lock the door,
>stay home and watch television.
Sigh. I know the feeling. Well, I haven't quite
given up yet; I hope you haven't either.
-R
--
Randy Clark {}!autodesk.com!randyc
"Whose mind is it that doesn't suffer a loud takeover
once in a while?" -- Maxine Hong Kingston
Joseph Francis
OK Coke-Can, the gloves are off! ;-)
Next time you're going to have to wear a midriff-exposing latex number
*AND* the push-up underwear *AND* the ball gag and chain you to the
bar in the Keller with a cucumber beside you. With "HOT LUBE!", and a
sign "Beer Responsive".
Nipples still tingling?
Joseph Francis
>
>In article <C0up9...@athena.cs.uga.edu> he...@athena.cs.uga.edu
>(Terrance Heath) writes:
>> I've had some experience being on both sides of the
>>race-fetish issue, sort of. It's an unsettling thing to lie in bed
>>with a man who looks at one's penis and says "I guess its true what
>>they say about black men", [...]
>
> I think you just violated the Squirrel Rule
> about self revelations in this newsgroup. :-)
>
> But on the serious side of what you're saying,
> I can well imagine the awkwardness, difficulty,
> and even degrading aspect of these situations.
> No one should have to go through them, but of
> course they do happen.
There is a problem with this discussion in that for sex, lots of
things which would sound nasty ordinarily work wonderfully in bed,
racial things included. There are many reasons he could say "I guess
its true what they say about black men - ", then you fill in the blank
with "they make better lovers", or "They're less inhibited", or
"They've big cocks", or "They know how to kiss", whatever. How about
being in Europe and getting "I guess its true what they say about
Americans", that they like to suck cock, and they do it well. Or what
if they say "you sure have a big cock for a <X>" - yummmmmmm". I get
French men who want big muscley arms around them, want me to lie on
them and cover them up like a blanket, to be a big teddybear. Is this
bad, or good?
How about: someone who likes to talk 'dirty'. Someone who lets rip
"Yeah, c'mon, you like that, cocksucker, lick it, no you can't eat it
all now, taste it, sniff it, you want some of that big cock, yeah,
c'mon, get it wet, you want to swallow that big fat black cock, you
like black cock, yeah, whiteboy, c'mon motherfuckin' whiteboy, eat
that big black cock, choke on it, fucker, " and on and on. Then the
flipside "you gonna give it to me? Look at that cock, that's the
biggest meanest motherfuckin black cock I've ever seen, fucker, you
whooee you got one of those big blaaaaack uncut anteaters, ya gonna
fuck my face, you gonna make me choke (and for the initiates "I wanna
take it like a dog, c'mon make me bark motherfucker, put that big
black club in that ass and make me bark baby!). And so on.
Racist? Sure. Hot? Possibly. Fun? If you like talking. And all this
can exist completely independent of /being/ racist and /acting/
racist. Tricky to complain about, when the teller may have different
motivations from what one believes.
Racism has its uses, as does homophobia (use of the word "Faggot" at
appropriate times; much S&M is all about imbalance and degradation).
Transgression can be exciting for all partie involved. The trick is to
be in agreement beforehand what goes and what doesn't.
IUn the situation you outlined above, I don't think the person was
partilarly clueful, but I don't have all the situation pictured. There
are other stupid things for people to say. How about "that was really
professional". I've always wondered what that was supposed to mean,
and it never felt like it was just super super positive. And I can't
imagine it being used to be sexually playful - "C'mon, give me a
really professional assfuck. You've got the cock and balls, do your
best."
This article does not, BTW, reflect on how I actually have sex; I
usually am quiet and submissive, and hesitant about undressing or nude
body-to-body contact with anyone whom I've known for less than a yea;
there are always satin sheets, and wonderful music, total privacy, and
relentless sensitivity.
Rod Williams
>
> You're right about these things varying regionally.
> Here in SF, I encounter black/white racism only
Yikes! Randy, I presume you're referring to overtly racist
behavior by individuals, rather than the City's segregation
policies?
a flying squirrel
> I think you just violated the Squirrel Rule
> about self revelations in this newsgroup. :-)
Do _I_ know about this "squirrel rule", dear?
--
a flying squirrel is: ric...@apple.com Apple Computer Inc.
"Sex is a filter, and it admits a certain vision." - William S. Burroughs
Caroline Jean Lee
ande...@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
(on black gay men)
>How can one account for this apparently greater reluctance
>to come out? I've read a little about this, where I've seen
>mentioned the influence of the church, the idea that
>homosexuality is a "white abberation," and things of that
>sort.
To me, the greater reluctance of black gay men to come out is not only a
measure of the homophobia within black communities, it is a measure of
the racism within gay communities.
---long explication, those with short attention spans should cut here---
The "gay community" provides many white gay men and lesbians with a
whole system of gay networks, support, social settings, and, for the
lack of a better word, "safe space" where it's safe and fun to be gay.
Tho people argue over the term "gay community" and its implications, I
think it's safe to say that there is often a sense of community, and a
very vibrant one.
Unfortunately, it's not a "safe space" in terms of being of color.
It's overwhelmingly white, and quite frankly, that gayspace is not
nonracist space.
What it boils down to, is that while the gay community remains racist
and overwhelmingly white, queers of color need the support and
networks of their (often homophobic) communities of color, so they
don't come out.
Also, another thing I have seen is that many, many white GLBOs who can
immerse themselves in the "gay community" and get all the support that
they need from it are really insensitive to the needs of various
people (not just different racial groups) to be closeted, for whatever
reason, or to the fact that the degree of support they find among the
gay community just won't be there for other groups.
Caroline
Tim Mansfield
>This article does not, BTW, reflect on how I actually have sex; I
>usually am quiet and submissive, and hesitant about undressing or nude
>body-to-body contact with anyone whom I've known for less than a yea;
>there are always satin sheets, and wonderful music, total privacy, and
>relentless sensitivity.
Pffffffp!! Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha (and other completely unnecessary
giggling noise and snorts of incredulity) hrmm ahem snif cough mmmm...
--
Tim Mansfield tim...@cs.uq.oz.au
Dept of Comp Sci, Uni of Qld, Australia, 4072 +61 (0)7 365 2956
"Nothing is wrong with the idea that there would be a God...
who changes the water." m...@softway.oz (Mark V. Shaney)
FJ!!
>OK Coke-Can, the gloves are off! ;-)
Just the gloves? (Coke-Can, Coke-Can...ummm he's refferring to my
intellect. No, my left big toe. Umm... je crois pas, maybe my biceps.)
>Next time you're going to have to wear a midriff-exposing latex number
>*AND* the push-up underwear *AND* the ball gag and chain you to the
For the audience wondering: of course I can borrow these clothes from
him. I just hope they're still in one piece after all the times he
wears them.
>bar in the Keller with a cucumber beside you. With "HOT LUBE!",
The whole outfit would make for a change. I'd like a slow uneventful night.
>and a sign "Beer Responsive".
Ugh, the gloves are off. You know I don't do alcohol
>Nipples still tingling?
After a week? He may have been experienced, but he wasn't _that_ good.
And I still haven't had sex. I'm losing my touch.
I never told you what happened: we (Jack, and the tall balding guy and
the cute barman and some other guy went to the Manhattan. First the
barman sat next to Jack, but after two minutes of his driving he came
to the back of the van telling us that someone else had to sit there. I
volunteered: "je l'ais fais plus, c'est tres simple: on ferme les
yeux." I kinda liked the music there, after years of rave-style music I
had to adjust severely to dance to it, especially with those boots on.
I never thought I'd dance to "ooh, ooh, let's all chant." Fun. Kinda
like "Cruisin'", but without the darkroom-action.
Of course Jack left without me, so I took a cab.
FJ!!
FJ!!
:This article does not, BTW, reflect on how I actually have sex; I
:usually am quiet and submissive, and hesitant about undressing or nude
:body-to-body contact with anyone whom I've known for less than a yea;
:there are always satin sheets, and wonderful music, total privacy, and
:relentless sensitivity.
Is that it? We haven't known each-other long enough. And that is why
you wanted me to bring you black satin.
Gawd, I had started to think it was me.
FJ!!
Anthony Berno
Francis) writes:
> How about: someone who likes to talk 'dirty'. Someone who lets rip
> "Yeah, c'mon, you like that, cocksucker, lick it, no you can't eat it
> all now, taste it, sniff it, you want some of that big cock, yeah,
> c'mon, get it wet, you want to swallow that big fat black cock, you
> like black cock, yeah, whiteboy, c'mon motherfuckin' whiteboy, eat
> that big black cock, choke on it, fucker, " and on and on.
Oh sweet, sweet ambiguity. Fantasy or reality? It's *so* much better when
you don't *quite* know for sure.
> And I can't
> imagine it being used to be sexually playful - "C'mon, give me a
> really professional assfuck. You've got the cock and balls, do your
> best."
Haven't you seen Mapplethorpe's "Man in Polyester Suit"?
> This article does not, BTW, reflect on how I actually have sex; I
> usually am quiet and submissive, and hesitant about undressing or nude
> body-to-body contact with anyone whom I've known for less than a year
Oh, right. I'm, like, *so* sure.
-Anthony
Tovah Hollander
>I usually am quiet and submissive, and hesitant about undressing or nude
>body-to-body contact with anyone whom I've known for less than a yea;
^^^
Fortunately, that's all that's usually necessary...
--
Tovah Hollander
to...@panix.com -or- to...@onion.salad.mssm.edu
ryerson.schwark
>Joseph Francis writes:
>
>>I usually am quiet and submissive, and hesitant about undressing or nude
>>body-to-body contact with anyone whom I've known for less than a yea;
> ^^^
>Fortunately, that's all that's usually necessary...
I'm told on good authority that nay works too.
Randy Clark
In article <1993Jan18....@PacBell.COM> rjw...@PacBell.COM
(Rod Williams) writes:
>> ran...@Autodesk.COM (Randy Clark) writes:
>>
>> You're right about these things varying regionally.
>> Here in SF, I encounter black/white racism only
>> infrequently...
>
>Yikes! Randy, I presume you're referring to overtly racist
>behavior by individuals, rather than the City's segregation
>policies?
Oh, dear. No, I didn't mean to imply that we don't
have our "share" of racial problems, some of them very
serious indeed; some of them -- as Rod rightly points
out -- sponsored by the government.
I was talking merely of my social circles, mostly
gayfolk and fellow travelers. That was more or
less the context that Terrance was talking about in
the first place.
Terrance Heath
>
>(Terrance Heath) writes:
>> I've had some experience being on both sides of the
>>race-fetish issue, sort of. It's an unsettling thing to lie in bed
>>with a man who looks at one's penis and says "I guess its true what
>>they say about black men", [...]
>
> I think you just violated the Squirrel Rule
> about self revelations in this newsgroup. :-)
Squirrel Rule? Never heard of it, but I can guess what it
might entail, given what I said above (quite without realizing it, I
might add.).
> But on the serious side of what you're saying,
> I can well imagine the awkwardness, difficulty,
> and even degrading aspect of these situations.
> No one should have to go through them, but of
> course they do happen.
>
> I have no general, all-purpose solutions.
> I wish someone did.
Well, if I come up with any, first I'll write a book and go on
the talk-show circuit and make millions. Then....
>> The whole mess had made me more and more suspicious of some
>>white gay men, particularly those who display an interest in me,
>>because I've no real way of knowing what there interests really are.
>
> Once burned ...
> Whether it's racism or just
> general manipulation/objectification, I'm at a
> point right now where, like you, I'm generally
> suspicious of displays of interest, unless the
> person in question is already someone I know
> (and like). I wish it weren't that way
>
> What I'm trying to say here, I guess, is that your
> experience generalizes beyond the race question in
> some ways.
I suppose it does. It reminds me of something someone posted
about relationships between hearing persons and deaf persons.
>>Even if its someone I've known for a while, I've discovered that its
>>easy to know a person for a while and not know just how racist they
>>are deep down.
>
>> Anyway, this is probably one of the things that frustrates me
>>most about the gay male community, particularly here in the south
>>where most of our southern belles are deathly allergic to chocolate,
>>and most gay men of color aren't merely closeted, they're in the
>>shoeox under the floorboards in the closet.
>
> What a turn of phrase! I got a (sad) chuckle out
> of this.
YOU got a sad chuckle out of it? C'mere and let me tell you
about a sad chuckle.
>>After a while, it makes a
>>lot more sense to just take the phone off the hook, lock the door,
>>stay home and watch television.
>
> Sigh. I know the feeling. Well, I haven't quite
> given up yet; I hope you haven't either.
>
Admittedly, when I wrote that last part I was indulging in
feeling quite sorry for myself. Anyway, I have about given up on
finding a relationship in this town. HOwever, I may have to learn to
live with it, since its likely to be another year or so before I can
afford to move, and I've already been here six years. Ugh. Perhaps a
larger city will at least provide greater chances, etc. I dunno.
Chip Graham
>>> Anyway, this is probably one of the things that frustrates me
>>>most about the gay male community, particularly here in the south
>>>where most of our southern belles are deathly allergic to chocolate,
>>>and most gay men of color aren't merely closeted, they're in the
>>>shoeox under the floorboards in the closet.
>>
May I interject here? This brings up an interesting point, and I will most
likely get into all kinds of shit for saying this, BUT, the thought behind
what I am about to say is what is most important....(God, what a disclaimer!)
IMHO, one of the reasons that there is such a problem between races in the
south is exaclty what you said: most gay men of color aren't merely closeted,
they're in the shoebox under the floorboards.... We don't know you! I have
never been a racist, and I wish I had more friends of color. I enjoy the
diversity, I also enjoy the commonality that we share. But there are so few
men of color who are active in the community that I'm not given that
opportunity. It's kind of like if you don't have the exposure to someone or
some thing, then you have nothing to go on but the stereotypes because you
haven't experienced the reality. I try not to think that way, but I know
people do, and sometimes I am equally guilty.
Ok, now before you blast away at me.....think!
--
Chip Graham cgr...@convex.com +1 214 497 4642
Convex Computer Corporation
3000 Waterview Parkway
Box 833851, Richardson,Tx,75083