Most women will readily admit if they think another woman is attractive. So, why is it that a lot of men will never say the same about another man, no matter how attractive he is? Their standard response is, "well, i can't judge if he's good looking or not. i'm a man. i can't make such decisions". stupid, if you ask me. (note however, that the very same men have no hesitation in expressing their lack of appeal toward an ugly man).

maybe i'm wrong about this, but i don't think men have to worry about a social stigma when it comes to exhibiting a feminine aspect of themselves. but that's because i, myself, am not the sort of person to judge a man's sexual orientation if he decides to wear a pink shirt. personally, i couldn't care less. i wear blue shirts sometimes. what does that make me?

If the man is big and athletic by his natural looks, he may behave in a somewhat feminine manner without taking a risk of being considered feminine. However a small and unathletic he will need to avoid unnecessary signs of feminity.

Examples: Tom Selleck, Arnold Schwartsennegger or Mel Gibson may easily engage into salad eating, diaper changing, aerobics, sewing etc. without risking their masculinity. However, guys who look like Johnny Depp or Hugh Grant have less freedom in expressing their feminine qualities, or wearing jewelry etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SosiologiR:
I have a theory of "total masculinity" which determines whether a man may act and look feminine or not.

If the man is big and athletic by his natural looks, he may behave in a somewhat feminine manner without taking a risk of being considered feminine. However a small and unathletic he will need to avoid unnecessary signs of feminity.

---

For what it's worth, I've always been amazed that it's often the big, str8, frat-boy types who can do the best imitation of a stereotypical, extremelly effeminate guy.

[ 23 April 2005: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]

Subject Verb Object.

Man Fucks Woman.

At least I hope that's what Disobedient meant

Actually, this way of thinking about sex one of the things that I hope is being eroded as a diversity of sexualities are increasingly being accepted and celebrated. This is one of the reasons that I think SSM is a threat to the existing gender order, and why it is so fiercely opposed by some straight men.
edited to add:

That picture of Harper and MacKay is the BEST!

[ 23 April 2005: Message edited by: Mush ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ephemeral:
but how on earth did salad-eating become a female thing to do, and burgers make one manly?? food is food. we all need a few greens and meat protein and iron, don't we? females actually need more meat iron than males.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:
It's so hard to tell by just looking, but take a stab at it... who looks more gay to you?

---

quote:

---

If it happens the other way around, or Man fucks Man, it screws up the carefully arranged hierarchy.

---

man fucks woman, woman fucks man, or any other combination of those three words... if they're all consenting adults, i don't see that it upsets any hierarchy. i'm not getting your point here! perhaps the only thing being upset here is the reproduction process.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:
*ahem*

Care to ellicidate about this stunning bit of... er... logic?

---

Only if you care to explain what the heck ellicidate means. Guess you meant elucidate huh?

Anyway, that "stunning bit of logic" belongs to Catherine Mackinnon, not me. Actually, Mackinnon drives me batshit... But her concepts regarding sex and intercourse are interesting. Men fuck. Women get fucked. Getting fucked is not good. Stands to reason that would apply on the gay scene as well.

I think a lot of Mackinnon's interpretation of sex language and its negative connotations, and her really strict gender definition has to do with her ideological predisposition, not a serious analysis. She, like Lionel Tiger, found what she wanted to find in her evidence.

[ 23 April 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Hmph, no one looks more "gay", but Harper looks to be in love with Mackay...

---

Agreed... I was actually having a bit of fun with some people's choices of words, and showing a couple of apparent "alpha males" displaying their "total masculinity".

quote:

---

Originally posted by disobedient:
Only if you care to explain what the heck ellicidate means. Guess you meant elucidate huh?

---

Touché.

quote:

---

Anyway, that "stunning bit of logic" belongs to Catherine Mackinnon, not me. Actually, Mackinnon drives me batshit... But her concepts regarding sex and intercourse are interesting. Men fuck. Women get fucked. Getting fucked is not good. Stands to reason that would apply on the gay scene as well.

---

Well, I've never read any Mackinnon, but she (or was that you?) obviously understands SFA about gay men. "Getting fucked is not good"? Don't put your values on everyone else. I've heard friends complain about someone who did it poorly, but they were not condemning the act itself.

quote:

---

When men insult one another, the worst things they can say involve female or feminine things. You cunt. You sissy. You girlyman. You vagina. You cocksucker. You fag. You don't hear men or women calling women dicks, pussyfuckers or pricks. That's because in the sexual hierarchy, those aren't bad things to be.

---

I think what you meant to say is when SOME men insult each other... And I DO hear some women insulting each other using those terms. I also hear some men referring to other men as "pricks" and whatnot, and trust me, it is *not* meant in a complimentary manner.

I'm with Tape. I fail to understand why some people think they can just transpose "rules of interpersonal sexual relationships" from straights onto gays and think that the same applies equally well in both cases. Despite some people's belief that SSM will prove we're "just like straights" (and yes, I hear that from some "assimilationist" gay men, too), we are not "just like straights" and never *will* be.

And personally, I have no desire to be, either.

[ 23 April 2005: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]

quote:

---

harper sure looks purty with those dreamy eyes. i think mackay is trying to avoid his gaze though.

---

If my husband had a female co-worker that looked that way at him I'd get him to find a new job! I am sure nothing is going on but what a photo op!

quote:

---

When men insult one another, the worst things they can say involve female or feminine things. You c--t. You sissy. You girlyman. You vagina. You c-------r. You f-g. You don't hear men or women calling women d---s, p----------s or p----s. That's because in the sexual hierarchy, those aren't bad things to be.

---

I don't know. I think those are all bad words. And I've heard women use those terms towards men. It's shameful. Nobody should talk like that.

quote:

---

Women say I want to fuck so and so all the time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:
Harper in love with Mackay......Agreed... I was actually having a bit of fun with some people's choices of words, and showing a couple of apparent "alpha males" displaying their "total masculinity".

---

quote:

---

Unless it's you how would you know that?

---

Uhhh, cause I have female friends who talk to me about their lives.

It is amazing how much of these discussion seem to come from the apparent belief that men and women can't talk to each other or be open with each otehr. Or be friends.

[ 23 April 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

It is amazing how much of these discussion seem to come from the apparent belief that men and women can't talk to wach other or be open with wach otehr.

---

zzzznntttt...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:

I think what you meant to say is when SOME men insult each other... And I DO hear some women insulting each other using those terms. I also hear some men referring to other men as "pricks" and whatnot, and trust me, it is *not* meant in a complimentary manner.

---

Okay, if you say so.

quote:

---

I'm with Tape. I fail to understand why some people think they can just transpose "rules of interpersonal sexual relationships" from straights onto gays and think that the same applies equally well in both cases. Despite some people's belief that SSM will prove we're "just like straights" (and yes, I hear that from some "assimilationist" gay men, too), we are not "just like straights" and never *will* be.

And personally, I have no desire to be, either.

---

Dude, I wasn't talking about people's sex lives, I was talking about the roots of homophobia, which is what I thought this thread was about. I wasn't throwing my values around, I mentioned something I'd read and made an observation. You seem hell bent on taking offense at everything I post though. What's your take on why straight men hate fags so much then? Oh, wait, sorry, let me rephrase that: Why do you suppose SOME men hate SOME homosexual men so much?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hailey:
If my husband had a female co-worker that looked that way at him I'd get him to find a new job! I am sure nothing is going on but what a photo op!

---

So... it'd be okay with you if a male co-worker looked at Mr. Hailey like that, then?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Remind:
Do you think Mackay taunts Harper mercilessly, with; "I know you want me....?"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by AppleSeed:

zzzznntttt...

Fadinn' outtaderent.... cu bulbv4
Whaddtymdstdd lqr st vcls zany wy?

---

u caught me!

quote:

---

Originally posted by disobedient:
Dude, I wasn't talking about people's sex lives, I was talking about the roots of homophobia, which is what I thought this thread was about. I wasn't throwing my values around, I mentioned something I'd read and made an observation.

---

Sorry. I guess more than anything it was taking issue with how you cited Mackinnon and then said,

quote:

---

Stands to reason that would apply on the gay scene as well.

---

it seems that according to mackinnon, men fuck women, and that's the only way things should be done, and too bad for women because women are lower on the sexual heirarchy and getting fucked is never a good thing. seems to be very backward thinking for the sexual revolution.

disobedient, it was unclear to me as well if you were stating your own views or mackinnon's. at first i thought "subject verb object" heirarchy was your view, and then i thought you shared your view with mackinnon, and now i think that maybe you're just relating mackinnon's views on sexual heirarchy to us... i think...

anyway, yea, i am still trying to understand why male homophobes are homophobic. (i don't know of any female homophobes... maybe they're out there somewhere)

quote:

---

While "whipping" him with... naaaaawwww! I can't say it!

---

quote:

---

Uhhh, cause I have female friends who talk to me about their lives.

It is amazing how much of these discussion seem to come from the apparent belief that men and women can't talk to each other or be open with each otehr. Or be friends.

---

I wasn't trying to be dense. It just honestly never occured to me that someone would say that to someone other than the person that they were interested in.

quote:

---

So... it'd be okay with you if a male co-worker looked at Mr. Hailey like that, then?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ephemeral:

anyway, yea, i am still trying to understand why male homophobes are homophobic. (i don't know of any female homophobes... maybe they're out there somewhere)

---

Are you kidding? There are a great many female homophobes out there, it is not an entirely male sin.

I suspect that male homophobia, and much of the 'fear of being seen as gay' can be traced to insecurity, particularly in adolescence. Much like monkeys, young males are incredibly insecure, and constantly in fear of ostracism, or getting thumped by another male who is equally insecure but twice as big.

Most of us grow out of it, at least those of us who escape the confines of our initial social groups and see the rest of the world. Many do not, in large part because the insecurity is perpetuated in the workplace and social group - particularly if it is the same social group.

For example - while visiting my high school friends of yore, I have on several occasions made some of them quite uncomfortable through quite innocuous behaviours that don't fit the old patterns. They are, for the most part, still living in the same social context we all did 15 years ago, which includes insecurity and its resultant homophobia.

Understanding homophobia has two aspects, I think, because there are at least two types. There is the institutionalized homophobia of the theocon Christian right etc. Then there is the homophobia that is more accuratelt defined as ignorance combined with insecurity. Sometimes, but not always, they are combined.

I am inclined to think that the first is a much tougher nut to crack, because it is purported to be 'received wisdom.' The second cracks really easily, if people get outside their context and have a relatively open mind. That part will change with time, though it certainly has some pretty awful impacts (bashing etc.).

quote:

---

Originally posted by ephemeral:
maybe the big, straight, frat-boy types are more confident about mimicking/mocking a gay man. it's possible that some men can get away with exhibiting effeminism (even in mockery) because of their greater masculinity.

---

Good point!

quote:

---

but how on earth did salad-eating become a female thing to do, and burgers make one manly??

---

That is just stereotypization with a touch of humour. You know, the unsofisticated, middle aged rural, working class (or farmer) men consider themselves more masculine than urban men. Yet, they do not eat as much vegetables.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ephemeral:
anyway, yea, i am still trying to understand why male homophobes are homophobic. (i don't know of any female homophobes... maybe they're out there somewhere)

---

Cheryl Gallant, Elsie Wayne, Bev desjarlais, Senator ann Cools... need I go on? The House has a whole slew of them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:

And arborman, well said...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by arborman:
Uhoh, does this mean I'm gay?

---

Nawww, prolly just *happy*!

quote:

---

What will arborwoman think?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by disobedient:
But her concepts regarding sex and intercourse are interesting. Men fuck. Women get fucked. Getting fucked is not good. Stands to reason that would apply on the gay scene as well.

When men insult one another, the worst things they can say involve female or feminine things. You cunt. You sissy. You girlyman. You vagina. You cocksucker. You fag. You don't hear men or women calling women dicks, pussyfuckers or pricks. That's because in the sexual hierarchy, those aren't bad things to be.

---

quote:

---

I wasn't trying to be dense. It just honestly never occured to me that someone would say that to someone other than the person that they were interested in.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MasterDebator:

In one of the two porn threads I used the term "feminized queers" and was roundly criticized for doing so, including by one of the Mods. I believe you are indirectly confirming the fact that such a concept is far from unknown, though I regret I don't have a literary reference to rely on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MasterDebator:
In one of the two porn threads I used the term "feminized queers" and was roundly criticized for doing so, including by one of the Mods. I believe you are indirectly confirming the fact that such a concept is far from unknown, though I regret I don't have a literary reference to rely on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:
Cheryl Gallant, Elsie Wayne, Bev desjarlais, Senator ann Cools... need I go on? The House has a whole slew of them.

---

good point. thanks for reminding me. i couldn't think of any off the top of my head on my last post.

quote:

---

those stoopid, stoopid burger king and harvey's commercials

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
McKinnon's concepts are being hugely distorted here...

---

Whaaaa— are you trying to say "MasterDebator" and/or "disobedient" would do such a thing?! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! Why, they're straight, and they have books! BOOKS! Written by Important People!

Hmmppphh!! Next you'll be telling me a lot of those men commenting in the feminist forum don't know what they're talking about!

[ ]

[ 25 April 2005: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]

quote:

---

on the other hand, i worry about the messages sent out by popular media - tv series, burger commercials, tim horton's guylogical campaignweb page. There is a new standard being set for 'manliness'. salads are not for men, men eat burgers, if you're a man and generally considered a good dancer, you must be gay, etc... i wonder if all this media pressure is making men more homophobic (especially youth) because there is a new, unintelligent 'manly' standard to live up to.

---

But I have my own theory on homophobia. Those preachers and other men who really, really hate queers ... really hate themselves.

I think they are sexually intriqued and aroused by the thought of sex with another man. It is their own desires that repulse them. But rather than seek help or accept that such feelings might be normal, they instead project their anger toward the object of their taboo desire -- gay men.

So, yes, I think Hutcherson fantasizes about going down on his male parishioners.

[ 25 April 2005: Message edited by: WingNut ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:

Whaaaa— are you trying to say "MasterDebator" and/or "disobedient" would do such a thing?! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! Why, they're straight, and they have books! BOOKS! Written by Important People!

Hmmppphh!! Next you'll be telling me a lot of those men commenting in the feminist forum don't know what they're talking about!

[ ]

[ 25 April 2005: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]

---

So ... why the heck are we discussing male homophobia in the feminism forum again?

Oh right, this isn't really a feminism forum. i forgot where I was for a sec. Thanks for the tip babe!

quote:

---

Originally posted by disobedient:
So ... why the heck are we discussing male homophobia in the feminism forum again?

Oh right, this isn't really a feminism forum. i forgot where I was for a sec. Thanks for the tip babe!

---

Well, "homophobia" is not exclusively a male topic, is it?

quote:

---

originally posted by wingnut:
I think they are sexually intriqued and aroused by the thought of sex with another man. It is their own desires that repulse them. But rather than seek help or accept that such feelings might be normal, they instead project their anger toward the object of their taboo desire -- gay men.

---

you might just have a point there. i like that theory.

and you're probably right about ads having little impact on what being a man is all about. i admit that i am probably being too cold about the whole thing. but, there are so many ads that portray men as stupid, usually straight, and completely disconnected from women and gays, i can't help wondering if they somehow have some impact on male culture and homophobia.

maybe you'll understand what i'm trying to say if you check out tim horton's guyness test. it is really nothing more than a commercial for tim horton's products, and at the end of the test, you are rated as either manly man, credible hunk, mr. midpoint, masculo malnourished or sir chump-a-lot. they make it sound like the best thing you can be is manly man, and sir chump-a-lot needs to "start an intensive manliness rehabilitation program". being stupid, dirty (physically unclean) and sexist all rank high on being a 'real' man.