QUILTBAG Thread of Flagrant Homoeroticism

[SecretAsianMan]

Atari announces LGBT-themed Pridefest game

 

Yay?

[SecretAsianMan]

I don't know anything about Kim Kardashian other than she's famous for no good reason and there's a mobile game with her name on it.  So imagine my surprise when I found out that the game has gay relationships in it.  Nintendo's life simulator went out of it's way to remove gay relationships while a crappy (although apparently not THAT crappy) free to play mobile game includes them simply because it does.  This is the opposite of what I want.

[Gormongous]

I don't know anything about Kim Kardashian other than she's famous for no good reason and there's a mobile game with her name on it.  So imagine my surprise when I found out that the game has gay relationships in it.  Nintendo's life simulator went out of it's way to remove gay relationships while a crappy (although apparently not THAT crappy) free to play mobile game includes them simply because it does.  This is the opposite of what I want.

 

I feel like that's the difference between being a person (albeit a commodified celebrity person) and being a corporation. A person is allowed to have their own beliefs that they put into their own products, but most corporations try studiously not to have any beliefs, even though the lack of belief is clearly becoming a belief all its own, because beliefs inhibit profit. Incidentally, that's a big part of why corporate personhood is so silly, because it removes the veil.

[SecretAsianMan]

You're probably right (and I'm fairly certain you are) but I would still love to see a corporation like Nintendo actually do something like this instead of taking the "safe" road.

[Gormongous]

You're probably right (and I'm fairly certain you are) but I would still love to see a corporation like Nintendo actually do something like this instead of taking the "safe" road.

 

Oh no, agreed! Honestly, I think Nintendo is at its best when it lets its games be products of front-facing individuals with their own opinions. So far, they really only do that with Miyamoto, which I like but about whom I have mixed feelings.

[Ben X]

A person is allowed to have their own beliefs that they put into their own products

 

I doubt Kim had much personal involvement with the design of this game!

 

Whether she did or not, though, it's cool that the game is progressive (for gaming) and mainstream and successful.

[dibs]

So, every year in the county I grew up in, there is the Rose of Tralee festival, where lovely girls of Irish descent are brought together to decide on live television who is the loveliest. (If anyone is familiar with Father Ted, then, yes, that episode).

This years winner has broken the mold a bit by a) having tattoos, b ) having short hair* and c) revealing this weekend that she is a lesbian. Every bit of coverage I have seen has been positive about this. For instance, the Rose Committee which is probably made up entirely of old fuddy duddies had this to say:

 

She is a wonderful person, an attractive intelligent woman and a very worthy winner who happens to be gay.  Her sexuality will no doubt create some interest, hopefully all positive. She wants to be celebrated as Maria Walsh in the complete sense of her person and hopefully everyone will respect that.

.

 

I think she is setting up to be a really great role model, also she seems cool.

Yah!

 

 

*My sister and niece met her. my niece was super excited, but is a little hazy on her princess credentials "caus her hair isn't long". My sis just said she was one of the most stunning people she has ever met, and was lovely beyond all precedent.

[lizzyinthesky]

I feel like that's the difference between being a person (albeit a commodified celebrity person) and being a corporation. A person is allowed to have their own beliefs that they put into their own products, but most corporations try studiously not to have any beliefs, even though the lack of belief is clearly becoming a belief all its own, because beliefs inhibit profit. Incidentally, that's a big part of why corporate personhood is so silly, because it removes the veil.

But Kim Kardashian: Hollywood was made by a corporation, Glu Mobile. Kim just gave them a license to her name rights  and my understanding is they reskinned an existing hollywood game!

[Ben X]

Member of Congress (or their staffer) anonymously makes nasty trans-related Wikipedia edits.

[Bjorn]

Member of Congress (or their staffer) anonymously makes nasty trans-related Wikipedia edits.

 

I'll bet they went and searched for trans-porn as soon as they were done editing Wikipedia. This was shitty, leaving it here only so Tegan's thoughtful response makes sense. 

 

An author on Slate argued this week that kink should be considered a sexual orientation.  It's an awkward piece that even gets a bit insulting to a few groups, but I don't entirely disagree with it.  I think it's at least worth asking if the traditional words we've used for sexual orientation are really broken (they are), and if there is a better way to approach it. 

[tegan]

I'll bet they went and searched for trans-porn as soon as they were done editing Wikipedia.

 

Please don't say shit like this.

 

The whole "this anti-LGBT bigot is probably a closet case themselves" thing pisses me off, because it's a pretty insidious and dangerous stereotype that places the blame for homophobia on gay people themselves. It's true that every so often a famously anti-gay politician or other person in a position of power ends up being outed (and it just makes me hate them more every time), but the self-loathing of a few individuals does not change the fact that homophobia is and always has been overwhelmingly a product of straight people. Treating it as an issue of "this problem doesn't concern me because it's an issue of queer people oppressing other queer people," even as a joke, is a pretty dangerous (and itself kind of homophobic) way to remove yourself from the issue and place onus on queer people to fix a problem that isn't their responsibility to fix.

 

For a perfect example of what I mean, look at the ways that a lot of otherwise fairly progressive media like The Daily Show treat their coverage of Russia's anti-LGBT laws by insisting that a shirtless photo of Vladmir Putin riding a horse makes him gay. Putin's probably not gay, he's just an asshole.

 

 

 

(I realize I'm conflating attraction to transgender people with necessarily being LGBTQ when the two aren't necessarily the same thing, but I'm drawing my interpretation from the context here)

[Bjorn]

Please don't say shit like this.

 

You're right, it was unthoughtful and it's a hurtful stereotype to perpetrate. I apologize for that.  Thank you for correcting me, and for pointing out something I hadn't even considered before (the Daily Show's long running Putin thing). 

[MrHoatzin]

Hey, sup quiltbag.

Last time I queered out on these here hallowed pages was in the early years of the Feminism thread when I snapped back at Thunderpeel about whether I "identified with bi-sexuality" which was also a first public thought I've ever shared about being any kind of queer.

I had some time to think about stuff, play around, talk to people, and I have further thoughts to share.

I've identified as straight for ever because—while the foci of my attraction have been dudes and gals at different times, places, people—the loud monosexual consensus on both sides of the divide seemed adamant I pick a team and not fuck around outside of my playpen.

The tangential cultural tropes of gayness (femininity, Barbara Streisand, Golden Girls, etc) were just as unappealing to me as the cultural tropes of straightness (machismo, cock rock, mainstream heterosexual porn, etc)—but straightness is the default position and thus the assumed default of those who don't explicitly voice an opposition. The received view of what that opposition means is not exiting the monosexual binary, but just flipping within it.

I've never been in love with a dude the way I've been in love with girls, so even though I had moments of doubt as to whether I've been lying to myself all this time and was actually super gay but repressed, it was comforting to simply set up some parameters, "choose" my sexuality, and decide to be done with it. So I kept my straight mouth shut.

It's easy to not entertain disclosing any of this stuff when one is super happily lady-married for years and has parents who, while intellectual and not beholden to institutionalized bronze age superstitions, have throughout years blurted out ludicrous shit that I never felt like contesting—shit that more than anything showed a benignly folksy callous lack of reflection on any of the quiltbag letters. They are a product of a still very homophobic Serbia where skinheads beat up pride parades and cops let them. I have not known ANY openly gay people growing up, though in retrospect gay people were all around me. My parents have recently made some strides in processing gayness in their milieu, but leaving parent-facing closets is still not anything that I feel I must do. It would just baffle and confuse them.

Bisexuality has no cultural visibility whatsoever. There was nothing out there for me to to try on for size as I wrestled with these questions of identity growing up. I'm 31 and this is still largely true (I now realize I should've searched out more punky places to hang out, but I never saw that kind of punk for the noise that punk-flavored Hot-Topic pop made)...

Bi is perceived by both straight and gay people as a phase in becoming "fully" gay. When bi people get straight-married, it is assumed that they're no longer gay, or that they deserted their gay brethren. Lesbians are downright aggressive towards bi girls, to a much larger degree than gay men are toward bi men. When someone digs out a hint that some historical personage engaged in buggery, it is automatically proclaimed that so-and-so was GAY, often throwing away evidence of other-sex attraction. David Bowie says he was just fibbing when he was bi in the 70s—cause it was trendy!—and he's still holding on to that claim, that asshole...

"Do identify with bi-sexuality" is just such an impossible question to answer because bisexuality is a cultural placeholder the existence of which is so casually denied. The only reason that B is in the quiltbag is to enlarge the alliance, but it is really just a GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGgggglllqtgggg(G!) for all practical, political and social imagination purposes.



Thunderpeel's line of argument still rings as annoying. He holds that there is some kind of substance, a material that we're made of, of which the (highly culturally-cooked) sexual preference nomenclature/categorization is just a manifestation; that, naturally, we have to reconcile our internal identity of which we are well-aware before we step out and engage with other people according to that a-priori established substance... whereas really, the identity happens in the intersection of self and other people, at the point where we allow or disallow ourselves to follow our impulses based on outside cues as to our impulses' acceptability. The nature of those impulses is so much more nuanced than the official camps built for clearly demarcated identities such as gay vs straight allow for. That kind of identity-comes-before-practice thinking prevents a lot of people on fences from just fucking around with people they're attracted to, or trying the wrong kind of clothes, or whatever—because now the stakes are higher, they have to be true to their inner selves, define what they are, then adhere and not be damn dirty tourists.

I have more somewhat disjointed thoughts to dump on the topic, but this is already getting long and rambly...

TL;DR: I've come to prefer to think of myself as queer, to set myself apart from the normative impulses of our society, but everything past that is just elaboration which does not need to be institutionalized or searched out for in the genome or medicated away or whatever.

[Twig]

Obviously I don't speak for anyone but myself, but, as a straight white dude, I've never considered bisexuality a wishy-washy self-identification. I was honestly surprised when I got to that part of your post: "Bi is perceived by both straight and gay people as a phase in becoming "fully" gay." I've never even considered that a possibility, and reading it made me immediately think it was an incredibly stupid opinion to have. Sexuality isn't a binary thing. It's never been...

 

I don't know what the point of this post was. I'm sorry. ):

[tegan]

It's both true and truly disappointing that bisexuality gets such a weirdly negative reception from the LGBT community. It's sort of baffling. Trans people get totally shat on fairly often, too.

[Bjorn]

I'm consistently surprised, and disappointed, at the communities I've been a part of that aren't as open and loving of people of all types.  You would think that hetero-subcultures that involve sexuality would be more open than the mainstream, but that hasn't been my experience, particularly when it involves bi-men. 

[brkl]

Obviously I don't speak for anyone but myself, but, as a straight white dude, I've never considered bisexuality a wishy-washy self-identification. I was honestly surprised when I got to that part of your post: "Bi is perceived by both straight and gay people as a phase in becoming "fully" gay." I've never even considered that a possibility, and reading it made me immediately think it was an incredibly stupid opinion to have. Sexuality isn't a binary thing. It's never been...

I don't know what the point of this post was. I'm sorry. ):

My experience with how straight people conflate bi and gay is that it doesn't come from thinking that bi is wishy-washy, just that bi isn't straight, making bi people gay according to the one drop rule. Straight people aren't always interested in the details of people's identities: you're either the same or other.

[lizzyinthesky]

Frustrated right now. Vancouver is a great place for trans resources..but only if you're a city resident. Suburbs are excluded from all the things run by the 'Vancouver Coastal Health Authority' as far as I can tell :< Trying to figure out what's available in my particular suburb is a pain, they don't seem to have a great website like the Trans Health program at VCH

[Nachimir]

I've come to prefer to think of myself as queer, to set myself apart from the normative impulses of our society, but everything past that is just elaboration which does not need to be institutionalized or searched out for in the genome or medicated away or whatever.

 

I've never understood peoples scepticism toward bisexuality, but have heard it voiced occasionally, and even though I'm not bi it's always made sense to me that people would be attracted to others of any gender.

 

I'm not sure if that making post was a big deal for you or not, but I think it was a courageous post to make. From an ex who was cis but described herself as "technically female" due to her almost stereotypically masculine mind, to plenty of bi friends, to getting to know plenty of trans people through work, to conversations with friends who readily identify parts of their minds or personalities as not matching up to their culturally assigned gender, I've come to continuously see gender and sexuality as very fluid things. It always seems like, for all of those people, that it feels risky to stick their head above the parapet and say something non-heteronormative though.

[Hermie]

Yeah, I also think it's really cool and couragous that you took the time to write this and post it "out loud". 

 

 

It's too bad that a question from Thunderpeel has haunted you for two years like this, I doubt he meant it like that. On the other hand, by the end of the post it sounds like you have stepped closer to finding your OWN identity? Not as in "identifying as X", but you seem like you know more who you are instead of questioning yourself, fluid sexuality included.

 

 

 

You mention that "Bisexuality has no cultural visibility whatsoever", and I agree with that. It led me to an honest question: Is there such a thing as "bi culture"? You mentioned the stereotypes, but there's also gay clubs, media such as TV shows, music and literature aimed specifically at gay men, lesbian women or other groups such as drag artists. But does places, art or other things under the definition "culture" exist specifically for bi-sexual people? (Stating again, I'm genuinely curious.)

[Ben X]

Search doesn't return any results for "gaymer", though I'm pretty sure GaymerX has been discussed on these forums before, so I'm not sure if the Kickstarter for the third one (now renamed GX) has been linked to yet. There are a few companies who have sponsored or donated heavily. I wonder if they'll be getting linked to the asshole-gamers' blacklist?

[juv3nal]

Search doesn't return any results for "gaymer", though I'm pretty sure GaymerX has been discussed on these forums before, so I'm not sure if the Kickstarter for the third one (now renamed GX) has been linked to yet. There are a few companies who have sponsored or donated heavily. I wonder if they'll be getting linked to the asshole-gamers' blacklist?

 

 

I'm a guess you meant your link to go here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gaymercon/gx3-everyone-games

[Bjorn]

A 19-year-old (according to YouTube info) secretly recorded coming out to his family, at which point they lecture him about the bible, "choice", physically assault him, scream at him and call him slurs.  It's really hard to watch/listen to, but important to, particularly if you aren't someone who would ever have to even imagine this kind of family abuse. 

[Ben X]

I'm a guess you meant your link to go here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gaymercon/gx3-everyone-games

 

Oh ffs, yes I did, thanks!

[syntheticgerbil]

Bi is perceived by both straight and gay people as a phase in becoming "fully" gay. When bi people get straight-married, it is assumed that they're no longer gay, or that they deserted their gay brethren. Lesbians are downright aggressive towards bi girls, to a much larger degree than gay men are toward bi men. When someone digs out a hint that some historical personage engaged in buggery, it is automatically proclaimed that so-and-so was GAY, often throwing away evidence of other-sex attraction.

 

I'm guilty of feeling this way, but I've pretty much let it go as of sometime this year because of a conversation with someone. I guess the binary gay or straight is just easier to understand, at least that's how I felt.

 

Thunderpeel left the forum though so I wonder if he would have a different response these days?