Is Homosexual Identity Dependant on Homophobia ?

[Shippou-Sensei]

Forgive is a tricky term

I understand who I was and how I was that. I try to live my life in a way I wouldn't seriously regret later.

I think forgiveness comes from those negativity impacted by you own actions. I can't forgive myself because I'm not the one who can make that choice (I am influenced by the reception of my actions but not nearly as much as those the terms were applied to). Also not everyone will agree on that forgiveness.

I am OK with who I am now. Even though I recognise I still have flaws.

My hang ups do impact my thought on how others should view me but I'm willing to give myself a pass .

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Apologies if I have sidetracked a thread. 3am witterings.


All of what I have said (i think) can be applied to people's feelings about homosexuality.

I lucked out by all my immediate family bring Bi and having plenty of beloved Gay and Lesbian aunts and uncles.
However i kinda think all othering shares a common root so it's not bad to share experiences

Please forgive drunken and sleep deprived rants to the choir.

 

[8ball]

Forgive is a tricky term

I understand who I was and how I was that. I try to live my life in a way I wouldn't seriously regret later.

I think forgiveness comes from those negativity impacted by you own actions. I can't forgive myself because I'm not the one who can make that choice. Also not everyone will agree on that forgiveness.

I am OK with who I am now. Even though I recognise I still have flaws.

My hang ups do impact my thought on how others should view me but I'm willing to give myself a pass .

You can forgive yourself. The original meaning of forgiveness means “to forego revenge”. Revenge is not yours to take, and I’m pretty sure no one is seeking it.

Nobody benefits from us beating ourselves up when any lessons have already been learned.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

I'm not planning revenge on my self

I do plenty of that unconsciousnesly!

I do think anyone who wants vengeance against me is a bit wierd

But who am I to judge. I bet that CEO didn't expect Luigi to cap him

 

[friendofdorothy]

Sorry I don't know how you identify. Where you that 'enemy'?

I was asking were you a man.

Yeah, think she was mid/late 20’s and I was in my early 20’s (young, straight, v innocent and accepting).

She was a junior doctor at the time. I hope everything worked out. She was quite down on men generally (can’t argue with that), but was a really lovely person and would have made a good doctor.

You said you were young and straight, but i still have no idea if you are cis male or not? (Sorry if its obvious in other threads but i have a shit memory)

 

[8ball]

I was asking were you a man.

You said you were young and straight, but i still have no idea if you are cis male or not? (Sorry if its obvious in other threads but i have a shit memory)

Yes, cis male, sorry.

 

[brixtonscot]

I have missed most of the thread but my initial thoughts are

Homosexual identity is inate. The society you are born into doesn't change that.

Are you saying that homosexuals are born with innate ( inherent?) homosexual identity ?

Do you not think that sexual identity and behaviour/activity are quite different ?

If we consider sexual attraction as a significant factor in overall sexuality ,
do you think we are ALL born with our sexual attractions already formed ?

Or that all of our sexual attractions - of which gender/biological sex is potentially only one
component factor among many that could be formed , consciously or unconsciously , by all sorts
of changing factors which determine our particular likes and/or dislikes from our own personal experiences ?

Or do you think that its just homosexuals who’s sexually attractions are somehow already predetermined,
at birth ?

 

[brixtonscot]

We probably only know a small bit of how the development of sexuality works.

Very true……yet is much of the current mainstream lgbt movement largely based on the premise
of “ born this way “ ?

 

[Puddy_Tat]

i keep thinking i'll respond to this thread, then another angle gets added, so will probably do in instalments.

i'm not entirely comfortable with arguing about whether it's nature / nurture or what. some people are LGBTQ+, does it matter why or should 'we' and the rest of society just (as stonewall put it) deal with it?

arguing for 'born' will encourage some people to look for genetics, and at extreme, it could end up as one more gene scanned for before birth / early enough to have a selective abortion, or potentially to try and edit that gene.

arguing for 'made' will encourage some people to say it can be 'cured'.

having said that, i have met some homosexual men (i use the term intentionally, as some refuse to use the term 'gay' arguing that's a lifestyle not a sexual orientation) who seem to be motivated more through a hate / fear of women than an actual liking of men.

so maybe it's a bit of both and the answer is 'it depends'?

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Are you saying that homosexuals are born with innate ( inherent?) homosexual identity ?

Do you not think that sexual identity and behaviour/activity are quite different ?

If we consider sexual attraction as a significant factor in overall sexuality ,
do you think we are ALL born with our sexual attractions already formed ?

Or that all of our sexual attractions - of which gender/biological sex is potentially only one
component factor among many that could be formed , consciously or unconsciously , by all sorts
of changing factors which determine our particular likes and/or dislikes from our own personal experiences ?

Or do you think that its just homosexuals who’s sexually attractions are somehow already predetermined,
at birth ?

I mean identity as people are born with some inate aspects.

Some animals are homosexual. That isn't cultural. The same applies to humans.

The way that inate behaviour is expressed is of course influenced from culture.


Who we are is a blending of nature and nurture


Also how we feel isn't always how we act.
It is normal (edited to add: normal may not be the best term. Perhaps 'understandable' may be better. Difficult conversation there.) to be closeted if the surrounding culture is homophonic.


Again probably preaching to the choir for most

Feel a bit wierd as a nominally cis het male (have ace leanings) making sweeping statements

 

[Puddy_Tat]

(and for the avoidance of any confusion, cis gay male here - or at least so far exclusively gay, don't absolutely rule anything out but think alternatives are fairly unlikely now)

in answer to the original question then probably yes - if (and i'm approaching this from the male perspective) at least some men fancying other men some / most / all of the time wasn't a big deal at all, then there would probably be less of 'a gay identity' although any set of people with a minority interest, be that being gay or being in to morris dancing, will probably seek out others with shared interests.

any minority that's experiencing prejudice /discrimination is more likely to feel a need to get together for safe space / safety in numbers. compare and contrast with ethnic groups in the UK - there was probably more of 'an' ethnic minority community back when the NF were most active. Now, there are more visible 'ethnic minority' people in the mainstream (including a recent PM and other cabinet ministers) and there are more visible multiple communities. And some who will stir up shit for other minorities, (e.g. suella braverman and her comments about child grooming gangs)

There have been (as long as I can remember) some gay men who have taken pride (with a small P) in being 'non scene' or 'straight acting' and have criticised those who are too camp / visible / politically active. I'm not sure I have the knowledge of psychology to say whether that's internalised homophobia, attempting to cosy up to the establishment, or a genuine belief that assimilation and being 'good gays' is the path to equalities.

although some gay men seem to validate themselves by finding minorities (within gay menor otherwise) to feel superior to (again compare and contrast with some ethnic minority tory politicians). i'm inclined to agree with 'jon fielding' in one of the 'tales of the city' books that 'all that bitchy talk about twinks is just a queen's way of being a male chauvinist pig'.

In terms of the right to join the army and all that sort of thing - personally I've no desire to join the army. or to adopt kids. and i don't think i'm ever likely to have the sort of relationship i want to formalise with the state. and i was probably a bit old even to think about having sex with 16 year olds by the time the age of consent was equalised. but i can't accept that LGBTQ+ people should be legally barred from doing any of these on the same terms as straight people - if they want to.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

as for a gay identity (again, i'm approaching this only from the gay male perspective - others are better placed than me to take different angles) - as previous, is there one? (as in one and only one)? there's the non-scene types, various tribes of gay men, then there's what the health promotion / HIV prevention people call 'men who have sex with men' (who don't identify as 'gay' or even 'bi')

i remember some time ago when i was involved in voluntary things round HIV prevention having to try and explain to someone from the health authority that there wasn't a single 'gay community' who all know each other, socialise together and swap quiche recipes, so yes, we did need to carry on doing outreach work and so on.

i'm not quite old enough to have been involved in the section 28 campaign or the start of the HIV / AIDS crisis but can see that they would have led to more need for solidarity to defend the community/ies which isn't there now. there is perhaps a naivety in younger / more newly out men in thinking that prejudice / discrimination (and HIV) aren't a problem any more (in the UK at least) but is there a line between defensive solidarity and a siege mentality?

i have slight mixed feelings about the variety of sexual / gender identities there is now - it sometimes feels like the years when the soviet bloc was coming apart, every week or two, there's a new flag and you think 'where the heck's that?' except it's now a pride flag not a nation.

is there too much pressure to find a very specific identity and stick with it? or is it perfectly OK that people can find a way to be somewhere within LGBTQ+ that works for them? is it any of my business how other people choose to identify? i'm aware there are / were people out there who refuse to accept bisexuality as a valid identity which to me is wrong. i can't say that anyone else's identity within the LGBTQ+ world is wrong or not valid. i'm largely with the second guy in this cartoon. there are gay men out there who try to tell newcomers that their version of it is the 'right' way to be a 'proper' gay man. meh to that.

although not entirely sure the world has moved all that far beyond that - there are sub-cultures that become a uniform, be that the 'clone' look of the 80s, the 'bear' sub culture, the recent 'femboy' fashion. Ultimately, I'm ok about anyone dressing and behaving how they like, but wonder if there's too much pressure to conform to a different stereotype?

and as for the 'identity politics' argument, i've not yet come across a discussion of identity politics that doesn't end up coming down to cis, white, straight men telling the rest of us we're doing it wrong and can we kindly shut up so they can get on with the 'real' stuff.

people are multi dimensional. the working class i recognise includes people who are LGBTQ+, people who are disabled, people who are not 'white', and people who are a combination of these. If a group of workers in one trade, or one workplace, are being got at, most trade union members would not see it as 'divisive' to support them. i don't see it as wrong, from a socialist / trade union viewpoint, to stand up for worker being got at on grounds of race or sexuality and so on.

 

[friendofdorothy]

Yes, cis male, sorry.

That makes a big difference to everything you said about 'political lesbian'.

 

[friendofdorothy]

Hi Puddy_Tat what is the fem boy fashion?

 

[friendofdorothy]

and as for the 'identity politics' argument, i've not yet come across a discussion of identity politics that doesn't end up coming down to cis, white, straight men telling the rest of us we're doing it wrong and can we kindly shut up so they can get on with the 'real' stuff

Yes !

 

[friendofdorothy]

i have slight mixed feelings about the variety of sexual / gender identities there is now - it sometimes feels like the years when the soviet bloc was coming apart, every week or two, there's a new flag and you think 'where the heck's that?' except it's now a pride flag not a nation.

Yes who got to chose all those colours? I was rather confused when i saw the 'lesbian' colours (was that supposed to be red brown and beige? Or is it supposed to be apricot? Either way it is hideous!) Used to be either suffragette: purple, green and white - or leather dyke black. Lots of black triangles.

The flags, badges and bracelets etc seem like a cynical move to sell synthetic tat. Selling us back the very notion of our identity.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Hi Puddy_Tat what is the fem boy fashion?

wikipedia has a page here which is probably as good as any.

as i said before, i've no issues with people dressing / identifying how they like, but feel a bit uneasy with the conflation of gay / cross dressing / non-binary / trans * and the impression i get that there seems to be pressure to conform with a particular uniform / way of behaving.

i think it was one of the former sex pistols who said that the punk sub-culture became a uniform in its own right at which point it lost its way (or something like that)

* not that i see anything wrong with any combination of those, but they don't have to come as a set. some people seem to think they do.

i think we've had a thread before about gay men feeling they have to conform to a 'top' or 'bottom' stereotype (sometimes on grounds of age and / or body size / type) which touches on this as well.

Yes who got to chose all those colours?

didn't you get an invite to the committee meeting either?

 

[friendofdorothy]

Indeed. It’s why I have so much respect for that awkward couple that pushed so hard for straight people to be able to have civil partnerships.

Broke the push toward a patriarchal marriage model without leading to a two-tier system of legal rights.

The media really went for them at the time as if they were making some silly pedantic point, but I think they did us all a service.

I wouldn't rate that as such as such a big deal. Registry marriage / civil partnership is more or less the same thing except the name and international acceptability. Marriage was a failing institution for hetrosexual people. Don't recall anyone calling to reform or rename it til after us queers finally got some rights. Not sure how this does us all a service.

I think the Blair stopped short of calling same-sex partnerships 'marriage' so as not to offend the religious types, to whom it is a sacrament, they dont need any extra reasons to hate us more.

 

[8ball]

That makes a big difference to everything you said about 'political lesbian'.

It was late, I had been drinking, probably just forgot at the time.

 

[brixtonscot]

Yes !

Puddy_Tat said:
and as for the 'identity politics' argument, i've not yet come across a discussion of identity politics that doesn't end up coming down to cis, white, straight men telling the rest of us we're doing it wrong and can we kindly shut up so they can get on with the 'real' stuff.
________

Thanks Puddy_Tat & friendofdorothy for your thoughtful and considerate posts.
The above post does have some truth to it , and I would have agreed with it more , prior to the Identity Politics
thread on here. As I explained here - ( as a queer man )

#53 : Just to add that at the beginning of the previous Identity Politics thread on here ,
I had been generally in favour of my understanding of what “identity politics” was….
- going back to the 1970’s - support for the autonomous self-activity of oppressed groups within the working class ,
as part of a wider progressive anti-capitalist movement -
ie. as a means to an end with the eventual aim of overthrowing capitalism.( if only )

Currently reading the recently published book on Big Flame, reminded me how we attempted to put that theory in to practice…..possibly among the first within the organised Left in England.

That thread helped me realise that the prioritisation of “(essentialist) identity (minus the) politics” had become something very different over the ensuing decades
- ie. as an end in itself of being assimilated into capitalism.

It took me a while to get “my head round that” at first….
_________________

Part of my motivation in beginning this thread was as a critique of homosexual identity , as a queer man who has
become critical of what “ Identity Politics” has become….competition between ever increasing identities.

Another example - I can think of now , but I’m sure there’s more - Rhyd Wildermuth ( gay/queer man - I’m not sure how he identifies himself these days , last I knew he remains in a relationship with a man )

Here Be Monsters: How to Fight Capitalism Instead of Each Other - Repeater Books

Here Be Monsters speaks to a left that has forgotten its history, its potential, and its power. Gramsci spoke of a time of monsters or morbid symptoms. In the ancient world, monsters were not enemies, but rather divine warnings, symptoms of a world out of balance. Here Be Monsters meets these...

repeaterbooks.com

Here Be Monsters: How to Fight Capitalism Instead of Each Other​

Interweaving personal stories with engaging histories of political thought and the meanings of monsters, Rhyd Wildermuth reveals the roots of current identity conflicts and political contradictions in feminism, anti-racist theory, Marxism, Frankfurt School theorists, and the many other leftist attempts to put the world back into balance.