What they (the anti-man forces who control various traditional and modern human institutions like science and media) do, is to create extreme expectations on men to be heterosexual, if they're straight, mainstream, regular guys. And since 'heterosexuality' is seen as synonymous with manhood, men have this extreme pressure to oblige. They have no space to say they don't want to date women. Because it means you're not a man and you lose your position in the race for manhood as well as your public following if you're a celebrity.
This pressure that media keeps creating in a yet non-heterosexualized society like India seems extremely contrasting, when many macho male superheroes find it difficult to answer questions about who they're dating and what they like to date. Because they don't date. In fact, it is a serious affront to Indian culture which has no space for dating between unmarried males and females to be asked such a question. Men in most cases just keep quiet or fib.
But, then there are some who run away with it, and exploit this new criteria of manhood being enforced by the media and give it power.
The westernized media needs celebrities to be heterosexual in order to support its heterosexualization agenda.
A similar pressure is being build up on young males through Peer-pressure and through social networking internet channels like Orkut, that ask your sexual orientation as well as whether or not you're interested in dating. Now, with dating being increasingly being enforced as the new proof of manhood for the youth, as part of building up a previously unexisting 'heterosexual' identity, it is impossible for men to live their life according to their natural instincts and needs. I know innumerable common straight males who don't do dating (or are only forced to do it), but they keep on their profile accounts stuff like, "looking for dating women" and sexual orientation 'straight' (which is wrongly defined as being heterosexual).
Dec 13, 2009
Dec 10, 2009
The various levels of diffference between 'Gay' and 'Straight'
Because of the intense politicisation of manhood and men's spaces, and the intense fight between the men's spaces and the anti-man forces that control the larger society, in which the men's spaces have finally lost in the Western society, defeated first by the Judeo/Christian religion and then by Western science -- the difference between 'gay' and 'straight' exists in the society at several levels.
1. On the one extreme end is the invalid definition of the 'gay'-'straight' divide forwarded by the anti-man forces, and validated by (psuedo)-science ... even if authorized by the Western scientific institution ... that represents the formal definition accepted and enforced in the West, that says "Straight" means exclusively heterosexual, which it claims is the vast majority of masculine gendered males, who were erstwhile known as 'men'. And "Gay" means any male who is exclusively into another male.
This formal definition of "Gay" and "Straight" is totally based on the claimed or practices sexuality of males and has no element of 'Gender' in it, at least, at the outset.
2. On the other end is the original difference between 'gay' and 'straight', which existed in every human society of the past, and is still the very basis of the 'gay' and 'straight' divide even in the modern WEst (although this basis is not formally acknowledged) and which is also based on the actual biological differences between "Gay" and "Straight." This definition is totally about "Gender" and has no element of sexuality in it, at least at the outset.
3. In-between these two extreme positions taken by the anti=man forces and the men's spaces respectively -- that represents politicization of manhood and male identity on one hand and the male biology on the other == are numerous other definitions of 'gay' and 'straight' divide that still operate in the society, simultaneously, albeit in different situations and levels of the same society.
(i) Closer to the biological definition of 'straight' and 'gay' is the more medieval distinction of straight and gay, that although hinges basically on 'Gender' and thus doesn't negate the gender angle like the modern West's definition, yet defines Gender not in terms of masculinity and femininity itself, but rather, who does the penetration and who is penetrated. The penetrator is the 'masculine' gender, and thus 'man', while the penetrated is the feminine gender, and thus 'gay' according to this definition.
This definition is still practised in the entire non-Westernized world, although, Western Science is destroying this definition claiming to represent the truth itself.
This definition still exists in the modern Western 'Gay' and 'STraight' spaces as well, and lots of 'straight' males still have sex with other men, but claim only to penetrate and thus retain their straighthood, and lots of 'gays' have sex with straight males but since they get penetrated see the penetrators as straights (as long as the penetrator doesn't acknowledge his interest in men.
(ii) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SEXUAL INTEREST: Closer to the modern western definition of 'gay' and 'straight' is the distinction that is widely practised, though not acknowledged as such, by both 'gay' and 'straight' identified males, and is the definition that really rules the roost in the straight spaces, as well as the larger society.
As per this definition, the one who acknowledges his sexual interest in men is 'gay', while the one who doesn't accept this interest, although, he may have sex with males, even exclusively, (as long as he keeps displaying or proving that he actually has a sexual interest in women, and has no sexual interest in men).
Therefore, men never acknowledge their sexual interest in men in WEstern societies, and the trait of liking the male gender is restricted only to the population identified as 'gay' -- i.e. those who acknowledge their sexual interest in men (who're mostly the third genders).
Thus, the formal Western definitions, when enforced upon the male population boils down to this acknowledgement of sexual interest in men, with those who acknowledge it becoming 'gay' and those who don't acknowledge it become 'straight' == thus strengthening the myth that the majority of men are exclusively heterosexual.
(iii) There are also several auxilliary definitions of 'gay' and 'straight' that function within the Westernized 'gay' and 'straight' set ups, characterized by the formal definitions.
E.g.:
(a) The Gay world is divided between the gay 'gays' (denoting the third genders) and the 'straight-acting' gays (that represent the supposedly masculine gendered males).
(b) The Straight world is divided between the 'real men' and the 'lesser men' often derogatorily reffered to as 'gay.' E.g. accusing someone of being gay for not eating meat or for holding another male's hands even as friends. Here too, the real men are used for more masculine males, while 'gay' is used for males who are seen as less masculine or effeminate (as defined by the Western social roles of manhood/ straighthood).
1. On the one extreme end is the invalid definition of the 'gay'-'straight' divide forwarded by the anti-man forces, and validated by (psuedo)-science ... even if authorized by the Western scientific institution ... that represents the formal definition accepted and enforced in the West, that says "Straight" means exclusively heterosexual, which it claims is the vast majority of masculine gendered males, who were erstwhile known as 'men'. And "Gay" means any male who is exclusively into another male.
This formal definition of "Gay" and "Straight" is totally based on the claimed or practices sexuality of males and has no element of 'Gender' in it, at least, at the outset.
2. On the other end is the original difference between 'gay' and 'straight', which existed in every human society of the past, and is still the very basis of the 'gay' and 'straight' divide even in the modern WEst (although this basis is not formally acknowledged) and which is also based on the actual biological differences between "Gay" and "Straight." This definition is totally about "Gender" and has no element of sexuality in it, at least at the outset.
3. In-between these two extreme positions taken by the anti=man forces and the men's spaces respectively -- that represents politicization of manhood and male identity on one hand and the male biology on the other == are numerous other definitions of 'gay' and 'straight' divide that still operate in the society, simultaneously, albeit in different situations and levels of the same society.
(i) Closer to the biological definition of 'straight' and 'gay' is the more medieval distinction of straight and gay, that although hinges basically on 'Gender' and thus doesn't negate the gender angle like the modern West's definition, yet defines Gender not in terms of masculinity and femininity itself, but rather, who does the penetration and who is penetrated. The penetrator is the 'masculine' gender, and thus 'man', while the penetrated is the feminine gender, and thus 'gay' according to this definition.
This definition is still practised in the entire non-Westernized world, although, Western Science is destroying this definition claiming to represent the truth itself.
This definition still exists in the modern Western 'Gay' and 'STraight' spaces as well, and lots of 'straight' males still have sex with other men, but claim only to penetrate and thus retain their straighthood, and lots of 'gays' have sex with straight males but since they get penetrated see the penetrators as straights (as long as the penetrator doesn't acknowledge his interest in men.
(ii) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SEXUAL INTEREST: Closer to the modern western definition of 'gay' and 'straight' is the distinction that is widely practised, though not acknowledged as such, by both 'gay' and 'straight' identified males, and is the definition that really rules the roost in the straight spaces, as well as the larger society.
As per this definition, the one who acknowledges his sexual interest in men is 'gay', while the one who doesn't accept this interest, although, he may have sex with males, even exclusively, (as long as he keeps displaying or proving that he actually has a sexual interest in women, and has no sexual interest in men).
Therefore, men never acknowledge their sexual interest in men in WEstern societies, and the trait of liking the male gender is restricted only to the population identified as 'gay' -- i.e. those who acknowledge their sexual interest in men (who're mostly the third genders).
Thus, the formal Western definitions, when enforced upon the male population boils down to this acknowledgement of sexual interest in men, with those who acknowledge it becoming 'gay' and those who don't acknowledge it become 'straight' == thus strengthening the myth that the majority of men are exclusively heterosexual.
(iii) There are also several auxilliary definitions of 'gay' and 'straight' that function within the Westernized 'gay' and 'straight' set ups, characterized by the formal definitions.
E.g.:
(a) The Gay world is divided between the gay 'gays' (denoting the third genders) and the 'straight-acting' gays (that represent the supposedly masculine gendered males).
(b) The Straight world is divided between the 'real men' and the 'lesser men' often derogatorily reffered to as 'gay.' E.g. accusing someone of being gay for not eating meat or for holding another male's hands even as friends. Here too, the real men are used for more masculine males, while 'gay' is used for males who are seen as less masculine or effeminate (as defined by the Western social roles of manhood/ straighthood).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)