Something I'd like to clarify as a gay man. . .

[Brian_Expat]

Most GLBT people are not "radical queers" who would exclude straight people from our hotels or cheer discrimination against heterosexuals as payback. We seek equality under the law and a place in society alongside everyone else, not a snide effort to "get back" at perceived slights. Please keep this in mind when you read posts on gay issues.

There are a lot of arguments within the gay community about "conformity" and "free expression." Sadly the extremes within the community have prevailed in certain quarters.

To many, to be "self-independent" requires one to be a promiscuous whore who traipses around in buttless leather chaps, thinks monogamy and committed relationships are "oppressive," and view unsafe sex as "liberating."

Of course, the alternative, the "Log Cabin Republican" closet case who is "respectable" isn't all that attractive either.

Most of us just want to be left alone, have the freedom to marry the person we love and get the same benefits, and hate bigotry against straights, gays, blacks, Jews, etc. just as much as any other liberally-minded American. Please don't allow the posts by some self-proclaimed "radical queers" speak for the majority of gay people who don't seek "retribution," but rather, seek dignity for all people in all circumstances.

Thanks! :)

[xultar]

1. Well Said! n/t

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

2. "...as another gay man...."

I have to say some queers are just fabulously reactionary.

So, its extremely difficult to generalize.

For me, I have some issues with dealing with straight people as Im in a resolutley hetro/right wing environment.

So when I want to be around gay people I really dont llike to have straight people hanging out and gawking....so I dont mind "accidentally" spilling a drink on some breeder couple checking out the freaks.

[Brian_Expat]

3. That's where you and I differ. . .

. . . you want to go run and hide from the world. I choose to just live my life openly and honestly, as it comes.

You're frightened and convinced that every "breeder" is "staring to check out the freaks." You're convinced that every heterosexual is out to get you and make fun of you and hurt you.

You've segregated yourself from society to the point where you cannot even function without imagining straight people "gawking" at you. The reality is, for most straights, just like for most gays, seeing people of ANY sexual orientation hold hands or kiss is no big deal. Love in all its forms is beautiful.

If you REALLY want to be radical, try refusing to segregate yourself and live life openly where you are, rather than fleeing into a closet of self-segregation.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Brian_Expat]

38. You're still justifying bigotry. . .

. . . based on sexual orientation.

If someone creates chaos or a problem, they should be escorted out. They shouldn't be banned from entering based on sexual orientation. Assuming that straights are, by default, homophobic is WRONG.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

40. Im not saying they all are....

....Im just questioning the ones who go to gay bars to check out the freaks.

In my town gay bars are pretty tolerant,...we do see str8 couples who are bi-racial, and thats ok, as gay bars are one of the few places they would not be given a hassle. Its the other types, the ones there to check out the freaks, that bug me, and other patrons.

[Brian_Expat]

43. So you throw them out. . .

. . . when they make the comments. You don't bar them from entry just because they're straight. That's no different than what homophobes do to gay people.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

47. Oh well...

...at one bar I used to go to that was at the discretion of the owner.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

57. I'm straight and I've gone to gay bars

because I have friends who are gay and we wanted to go there. Nothing more mysterious than that. We had a good time. End of story. I'd hate to think some guy in there spilled beer on me because he thought I was there to "stare at the freaks".

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Brian_Expat]

39. What's patronizing. . .

. . . is the idea that all gay people agree that ghettofication is a good idea (or that "str8" is a clever appellation for that matter.)

I am personally tired of the idea common amongst straights (and taken as God's gospel truth in quarters of the gay community) that gays hate straights, people with kids, and are promiscuous radical queers who want to separate from society. I HATE the portrayals of gay life on TV, such as "Queer as Folk," that perpetuate that strategy.

And I double-hate the idea that straights must all be phobes because SOME make asses of themselves at gay bars. That's just as bigoted as the notion that women shouldn't let their husbands around gay men because we all try to seduce them away.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

42. its patronizing because...

...you are assuming your opinons are the only correct ones and dismissing other gay peoples experiences as irrelevant or not worthy of consideration.

[Brian_Expat]

44. I'm not dismissing anyone. . .

. . . just finding a voice for people who are completely unrepresented in the political discourse -- yet represent a silent majority of gay people.

[BostonTeaParty04]

4. Not sure how old you are.... but in the 80s Queer Nation SAVED

millions of gays... in their very RADICAL movement to insist on drug research for AIDS and funding for care and all sorts of things that many HIV positive people take for granted.

They were radical' they were mad; and they weren't going to stop yelling and screaming until this govt took action in re to AIDS treatment and diagnosis.

As a result, I can walk into any county clinic.... get a test for a reasonable amount of money... and have it be anonymous. As it should be. If not for Queer Nation, it would not be safe to get a test, because if the govt/insurers had had their way, everyone would have been tested and it duly noted 'future reference' (ie, no insurance... and perhaps much worse discrimination in society)

I am not gay... but I sure the hell wish Queer Nation would pop up soon.... the movement to protect YOUR 'leave me alone and just let me live' ASS is waning.... and needs some radicalism. Bless them. I respect your moderate approach to living in these tenuous times... but I sense that you don't have a good sense of history of the gay/lesbian movement, and therefore cannot appreciate the fact that you really CAN live a rather nice life, out of the closet. We need to gain more ground... but you have it pretty good. And it was the radicals who gifted that to you.

So what if a handful of people felt discriminated against. I hope to god they were WHITE... so maybe they will be even more sensitive to the discrimination that gays, blacks, handicapped experience every damn day of their lives!

It is offensive and sickening that this story of the key west gay hotel made the national news. "ooooooooo, the gays are being mean to the heteros." Fuck the heteros. I hope this experience gets those very heteros out in the street to fight for gay rights.

/end of rant. 'thanks for listening.... LOL

[Brian_Expat]

8. Queer Nation got lots of press. . .

. . . but it was the gay medical and legal communities who assured the rights you're talking about.

I sure the hell wish Queer Nation would pop up soon.... the movement to protect YOUR 'leave me alone and just let me live' ASS is waning

Not at all. As a matter of fact, I am truly "radical" in QN's eyes (and others') because I choose to live amongst others who are different from me as an out gay man. I don't choose the safety of the gay ghetto, a gay job, a gay florist and a gay car dealer. And I can be VERY quick as an activist to stop the right wing.

It's just I don't need to snap on bright pink leather buttless chaps and have an orgy on Main Street to make my case. Rather, I choose to humanize gay issues by living amongst a diverse community of all sexualities that's interconnected -- to create true understanding.

It is offensive and sickening that this story of the key west gay hotel made the national news. "ooooooooo, the gays are being mean to the heteros." Fuck the heteros.

This is precisely what I am talking about. Divisions and hatred do not create love and understanding. If gay people are to become full partners in the community, we cannot separate ourselves from it OR separate others.

The fact of the matter is, these gay-friendly heteros were turned away from a gay friendly establishment JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE STRAIGHT. That is absolutely NO DIFFERENT from a bigot in Iowa who would do the same at his hotel to a gay couple.

[BostonTeaParty04]

12. I guess it doesn't matter who was writing the new policies...

Cause as a college kid in the mid 80s... they totally opened my heterosexual eyes.

Bless them.

My problem is, I can't care about the key west heteros simply because the gay couple who got turned away in Iowa (per chance) wouldn't elicit even a raised eyebrow.

These supposedly 'gay friendly' hetero couples are the ones who made the big deal. Right? Who else would have reported this to the press? Was there a journalist standing there?

So, I have no sympathy for these key west couples... none. It happens. People get discriminated against everyday. If one gets discriminated against, do something proactive about it...... but don't run to the journalists about the mean ole gay hotel manager. That is no friend to the movement....

[Brian_Expat]

13. They were a necessary evil. . .

. . . though the people who brought real courage to others to come out were those who lived out lives within the general community. It takes a lot more courage to be an out gay person in a "straight world" than one who is a professional "Queer Radical" surrounded by support systems, IMO.

[mitchtv]

31. I am one of a kind, a sixties radical

and pretty much want nothing much to do with strate society. I live now in a large gay community, and am quite happy and fullfilled. I took part in the picket lines,and confrontations that marked the 60s and 70's . the riot at the SF examiner and the takeover of Rolling stone magazine. we 'ttok over the SIR and pushed for many rights the gays(I can't use the word Queer, sorry) that today are taken for granted eg Brown Act 1972. If you want to mix with strates , good for you, but I hardly find it radical, I am out and do business with strates all day long- but my friends... that's a different story. I find gays a welcome relief in the PM's

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

34. I tend to agree.

Its pretty clear one cant' totally segreate oneselve from str8 society...thats not realistic.

But, when I want to relax and let my hair down I prefer to be around gay folks.

[Brian_Expat]

41. In lots of urban gay communities, it's impossible to let your hair down. .

. . . one of my biggest problems with the urban gay ghetto is that they're quite happy to cruelly reject you if you don't have the right clothes, car, or physique.

Anyone who thinks that the gay community is all-accepting is fooling himself or herself. One of the first things I tell people who are coming out is to accept themselves fully first, because lots of people are going to reject them -- especially other gay people (which can hurt if you're not prepped for it).

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

48. My rather limited experience...

...is with perhaps more provincial gay communities that don't really have "urban gay ghettos", although I understand what you are talking about.

[mitchtv]

52. Don't get me wrong ,this is an area of the worst

element of gay society -Log Cabinettes -pompous queens are all over the place, and we have none of the requirements. like clothes , figure $$ and Car. But that's all happening in Str8 society , too, especially Socal, so what can you do? be someones token?. Ghetto is all in the mind- besides if my memory hold true( and that's getting harder) political power for 'us' came hand in hand with economic power and our politcal organizations came out of gay business associations like the Tavern Guild and the like. So do I give my money to a strate who pretends to like me , or a gay who does a better job of pretending? you must decide.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

28. Wasnt that ACT_UP?

I thought it was ACT-UP that was the activist grouip engaging in civil disobedience and street theatre to push the AIDS treatement/testing agenda.

[tishaLA]

55. You're right, of course.

As I posted n another thread, all LGBT movements are seen as radical in their moment, but now they look quite tame. The Mattachine Society was once a radical organization because they believed in equality for "homophiles." The drag queens who protested the Stonewall arrests were once radicals because they thought they should be able to congregate in a Greenwich Village bar without the police harassing them. And Queer Nation was the first group to talk about the full panoply of sexual possibilities, from marriage to anonymous sex, as acceptable modes of behavior for queer Americans. None of those seem radical to me at all....if you don't want to have a same sex marriage, don't have one; if you don't like anonymous sex, don't do it. Big deal. But the AIDS group was ACT UP, not QN.

On edit: Spelling. as always

[wryter2000]

5. I think we always need to keep in mind

We always need to keep in mind that no group is made up of individuals who think the same about everything. There's always going to be diversity of opinion, behavior, etc. in any group.

[Touchdown]

6. OT: Do me a favor...

Would you please go here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1423837&mesg_id=1423837

and tell Ursacorwin that there's hardly any old style square TVs left in the UK anymore?

On topic...I agree with you, to a point. I will not be an assimilationist, like the Log Cabinettes are. As a gay man, there are still some things that are exclusively gay men (like the nudity in a gay men's resort, that just so happens to be in a gay resort town like Key West), not because it's discriminatory, but because straights wouldn't feel comfortable in that. We shouldn't have to compromise our way of vacationing and "letting off steam" because we should welcome others who would be offended by exactly how we let off that steam.

[Brian_Expat]

10. You choose to let others' "offence" get to you. . .

Frankly, if some heterosexuals walked in and expressed outrage that I am holding another man's hand, well, that's their problem. I'll do it wherever I am -- public square, main street, or gay pub. If they don't like it, they can kiss off.

The underlying reality is that people who assume that heterosexuals would be offended by same-sex love and thus should be excluded are suffering from self-inflicted homophobia.

And no, the old square TVs haven't been used in the UK for decades. You can link him here if you want. ;)

[Touchdown]

17. Well, there's a difference between

someone being offended by holding hands and kissing, and a full out gay orgy, and oil wrestling contest at the hotel poolside. My comment was in reference to that Key West resort that renegged on booking the 3 straight couples (and a couple of threads that might have spawned these spin offs). It was a gay "clothing optional" resort.

Gays are unique in the minority categories in that most of us are not parents, and we have no compunctions about making most of our establishments without regard to making them "family friendly". If a straight couple wander into a hotel such as this, without knowing the context of a "gay man's resort" really means, then no, that's not my problem, but I can still empathize with them, since it's not widely advertized.

[Brian_Expat]

23. Regardless. . .

. . . imagine the furore that would result if the logic was reversed. In other words, a gay couple got thrown out of a straight establishment that was prone to heterosexual orgies and oil wrestling parties.

We're all adults, we can make our own decisions and act accordingly.

Incidentally, as a gay man, I wouldn't be comfortable in the middle of an orgy-type scene even if it WAS gay. I find the constant sexualization of anonymous people to be inherently dehumanizing, transforming us all into pieces of meat evaluated solely on our sexual attractiveness.

[mitchtv]

33. partner and I would love to see the 'chippendales"

I don't think that's permitted is it?

[Brian_Expat]

36. If it isn't, that's also wrong.

The point is, discrimination based on sexual orientation is ALWAYS wrong -- whether it's gay orientation or straight orientation.

[Catch22Dem]

11. While I don't disagree with you, completely

I'm sure you wouldn't feel the same way about a "whites only" resort. You know, white people letting off steam the way white people do. I oppose exclusion in ALL forms. Now, having said that, you're right. I'm sure I wouldn't be comfortable there.

[Brian_Expat]

14. If you don't feel comfortable, you'll leave

It's bigoted for the club owner to assume that ALL heterosexuals will feel "uncomfortable" just because they're heterosexual. As long as they leave the other people there alone, there should be no problem with them being there.

Only if they complain or cause a scene if they get hit on should they be asked to leave.

[Touchdown]

20. How do White people let off steam?

Drinking high balls, playing poker, canasta? Talking about 3 under par? Sitting there quietly with their wives as their feet dangle in the pool? Signing up for the bus trip to the shopping plaza? EVERYBODY DOES THAT!

Gay men are different because we don't have sex with women, and have these hotels for the specific reason to have as much sex as possible, with as many partners as possible, in as many corners of the hotel as possible! We wouldn't be gay if we wanted men to bring their wives along. I guess I have to spell it out to people. And yes, they do welcome straight people, just only men.

This isn't about discrimination. It's about promiscuity! It's about a hotel that is little more than a cheap thrill factory.

[Brian_Expat]

24. Wow

Some of the hotels I have stayed in were just gay-friendly hotels, not sex orgy factories. I find that sort of activity offensive if not clearly communicated, and I AM GAY!

I would probably leave if such activities were going on, especially since it often leads to unprotected sex between strangers and other irresponsible activities.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Brian_Expat]

49. I'm just saying. . .

. . . that if the rationale to ban straights is to keep out people who would be "offended" by unprotected sex parties, then banning straights isn't a very smart way to do this.

Lots of gay people, myself included, are horrified at the idea of unprotected sex with strangers and even more horrified with the recent soaring infection rates for syphilis, HIV and other STDs that are resulting from this sort of thing.

If I go to a gay resort, it's to relax, not be propositioned by a bunch of people who view me as a piece of meat. The fact that I am sexually attracted to men doesn't mean that I exist solely to serve as someone else's sexual receptacle, nor do I view such a worldview as healthy or empowering for those who hold that view.

I'm far from a moral arbiter -- you can do what you want. Just don't assume that all gay men happen to endorse irresponsible, unprotected promiscuous anonymous sex, or view it as "empowering." As someone who knows lots of people living with HIV, I would say such activities are ultimately more debilitating.

[Touchdown]

50. Who said any of this was unprotected?

I certainly didn't. Don't make assumptions, because you make an ass out of U, and umption.;-)

Unprotected sex is irresponsible...private gay men's clubs aren't in that kind of business, and do not condone that behavior. As a matter of fact, most establishments will expell patrons for that very thing.

Quit stereotyping.

[Brian_Expat]

51. Your experience is certainly different from mine. . .

. . . barebacking is on the rise BIG-TIME, and a lot of it occurs at the sex clubs.

That's not stereotyping, that's the truth, as evidenced by soaring STD rates. Promiscous anonymous sex increases your risk of all sorts of nasty bugs. Lots of us find that horrifying.

If a club didn't advertise itself as a sex club, but instead as a gay-friendly hotel, and turned out to be a sticky-floored skankfest, I wouldn't only be horrified, I'd be very angry for the false advertising. If I was looking for a nasty tea-room, I'd head downtown, not to a vacation spot.

[Neshanic]

56. This is offensive. British, living there and pontificating about here.

[Catch22Dem]

59. What's offensive about it?

I get the impression Brian is an American living in the UK, hense the "Expat" portion of his name.

Besides, we tell the rest of the world how THEY should live. So, what's offensive?

[doni_georgia]

7. Well said!

Thank you for this post. You describe the world I would like to see, and I believe your view typifies that of the vast majority of the GLBT community. Brother, I hope you get to see your dreams of equality. Just had the wonderful pleasure of attending my best friend and her partner's wedding reception in February. It breaks my heart that their marriage is not recognized in our state. She was married very unhappily to a total shit of a man for 8 years. She is finally married to someone who loves her beyond words. She is happy for the first time in her life, and she has to HIDE it, because as a school teacher in a district that doesn't protect the civil rights of GLBT peoples, she could lose her job if the wrong person found out about her. I can't imagine having to hide who you are like that. Unfortunately many people are ignorant, and also unfortunately many of these ignorant people see extremes in any group and paint everyone in that group with a broad brush - guilt by association. I pray some day that will change in this country.

[HFishbine]

9. Indeed, the "most of us" you describe

sounds like all of the gay people I know.

[terrya]

15. This is very well said. And we DON'T want "special rights"

By the same token, I'd like to add a comment.

My heterosexual friends, please don't buy into that religious right garbage about us demanding "special rights". Brian_Expat has stated, wonderfully, what we gay people want.

Ultimately, I want to move to Canada and marry my boyfriend, Doug. I want us to honor our loving, permanent relationship. I'm certainly not a "radical queer" who wants revenge against heterosexuals. We want our place at the table...nothing more.

Terry

[Brian_Expat]

16. I keep running into you, Mr. A

. . . as a certain gay guy who remembers you from an advocate board of long ago (look at the first three letters of my name for a clue!) ;)

Tell Doug I said hello and that I still have his CD from New York City! ;)

[terrya]

18. Yes, we do, Brian!

You're still in Massachusetts, right, Bri? :-)

I'll tell Doug "hi". And that you have his CD. :-)

Do you still keep in touch with some of the old IE gang? I miss that place....

Terry

[Brian_Expat]

22. No, I am living in England now. . .

. . . I couldn't bear not to live under her Majesty's benevolent rule. ;)

I don't talk to them very much these days, just Joe B! :D

[terrya]

25. The Queen is a nice lady. There are FAR worse things....

Like living here under the House of Bush....

Are you living in London?

Terry

[Brian_Expat]

37. You betcha!

I am living in London and dating in a somewhat stormy but still forming relationship. Very complex. :)

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

29. the Advocate Idea Exchange?

x

[terrya]

30. Yes. :-)

[Beam Me Up]

19. as yet another gay man. . . thanks, I share your point of view n/t

[lapfog_1]

21. I already knew that...

[Rowdyboy]

32. Nicely put....

As an out gay man in an long-term relationship, I hate the stereotypes that prevail in society of gays as bed-hopping sex addicts who do nothing but preen, backstab and cheat on each other.

As to the Key West story

While there are "hotels" where orgies occur, there is no indication that this is such a place. The straight couples were invited by a gay associate who probably just really liked the place and wanted to stay there. It was very tacky to throw them out.

[mitchtv]

35. We are going through a 'lawsuit' like thais at a gay Palm Springs hotel

no . I am dubious of the story - sorry

[rumguy]

46. well said

we live in a time where the shrillest voices on any issue seem to be the loudest

[foreigncorrespondent]

53. Brian...

...why do you feel the need to (in a round about way) apologize for the radical queers to the straight community?

The reason I am asking this question is because I am in shock to see someone willing to distance themselves from people, who, if were never born, we would never have been pushed hard enough to have Stonewall happen. The result of that would be, we would be living in a much more oppressed world, when it comes to the LGBT community.

I am certainly a person who will never associate myself with a group like Act/UP, but I certainly would never distance myself from them, meaning, I wouldn't make them an outcast of our community. Every group with in our community has a reason for being there.

It is the same with the LCR. They most likely see themselves as trying to teach tolerance and understanding to the repuke party, while we see them as self haters who are selling their souls to the devils party. Again, I would never distance myself from them. Whether we like it or not, THEY ARE PART OF OUR COMMUNITY.

I once wrote to Andrew Sullivan and let him know where I stood on the political scale, and explained to him that I wasn't writing to him in order to attack and have an email war with him. That my interest was more trying to understand why gay people would want to associate themselves with a group who don't see them as being legitimate people, with legitimate reasons for wanting rights. Unfortunately, he never replied to me, though.

As I said on another forum yesterday, I am so torn about this hotel's actions, but at the same time I understand why they would do it. But I am not about to distance myself from them.

Without the radical queers with in our community, we wouldn't have near as many rights as we do. Remember, Brian, when you try to distance yourself from these people, you are also distancing yourself from the founding parents of the gay movement.

[tishaLA]

58. Thanks for that FC

I agreee with you. But of course I have actually participated in ACT UP and QN. I think both groups did lots of good things; they don't look nearly as radical to me now as they felt back then.

[Neshanic]

54. Not so fast....

First off all, I wonder who these "posts by some self-proclaimed "radical queers" are by. I don't know of any that I have seen here. Andrew Sullivan gets his share, but he slings it and deserves it.

Second you state the blatantly obvious. "Most GLBT people are not "radical queers" who would exclude straight people from our hotels or cheer discrimination against heterosexuals as payback." As a gay man, I have had no experiences with this type of situation; on the contrary, gay men know exclusion and derision, so it's a very dated throwback to the 70's for the picture you draw. Strange too, because it was their activism that permits you to have the freedom to wear buttless leather chaps OR drive your Miata to meet an Orange County hunk, and live a gay Ozzie and Harriet life. You sling that "radical queer" thing pretty well. From your missive, one would think that there is a roving band of heterosexual bashers having wanton sex.

"Most of us just want to be left alone". Fair enough, but the men who came before you fought that battle that you reap the rewards of now, buttless chaps and all.

You sound a bit LCR, and bitter. Just my take.