Saturday, July 30, 2011

PMS Rant

Recently, I encountered two women in a professional relationship. One was a client of the other for legal purposes. The client, who was in this situation because of a car crash, didn't know what an axle was - she was at least my age and knew English, she just didn't understand how her own car worked and couldn't name various parts of it.
The other lady and I had a conversation aside from her client. We were discussing a medical professional and I mentioned how, since I've taken many anatomy-based figure drawing classes, it's refreshing to hear a doctor who speaks in terms I know. She said there are plenty of people who know what a trapezius is, I shouldn't make such a big deal of sharing that knowledge with the doctor. I replied "there are some people who don't know what an axle is."
She chuckled "many girls don't know about cars."


What really pisses me off is that she's right.
So many people, specifically men who're just minding their own business, will meet woman after woman after woman who knows nothing and needs her hand held...and then they expect the same of me. I can't blame them!

This isn't a problem of the sexes or the genders or the sexualities, it's what comes of heterosexism. Shulamith Firestone theorized that a man, with his male privilege, will pick a woman to elevate to his status. While there are probably very few men who have that specific thought process, her theory is evident in our culture. And Olive Schreiner noted "The less a woman has in her head the lighter she is for carrying.” Many straight women who rely on being elevated through a diamond ring will lighten the weights of their minds. This is how it works, up until a queer freak comes along and gunks up the clockwork.


Thursday, July 28, 2011

Gay Flirtation

A cousin of mine, a straight man, has worked on the railroad for decades. About ten years ago, he had to get glasses and, because of the nature of his work, had to get a glasses-necklace to make it easier to switch them off and on. When he picked out a holder, the store had a black one and a rainbow one. My cousin, bless his heart, is not the most aware guy. He thought "oh, these are snazzy" and bought the rainbow ones! He wore this rainbow glasses-necklace every day while working the railroad. He noticed, from then on, that men were honking at him and yelling "nice ass" at him much more often. Not one to turn away flattery, my cousin thought he must be lookin' pretty good! Finally, a coworker enlightened him that a rainbow is LGBTQ Pridewear - he was rather disappointed that the rainbow caught these guys' attention more than his ass.

His ass, though, had not changed. Only when he wore this rainbow glasses-necklace, not knowing what it signified, did men catcall him. The fact that he was perceived as gay brought on this attention.

There has been a theory for decades that chauvinistic straight men are homophobic because they fear that gay men will mistreat them, just like how they mistreat women. Many homophobic men will actually admit that's why they're homophobic (sometimes with pride).

Yes, there are predatory gay people and, yes, my cousin's situation is only one person's. However, his story implies that the fear of these homophobes is unfounded. Many gay men won't catcall straight men, either out of fear of retribution or because it would be pointless.

While I'd like to say that a gay man wouldn't hit on a homophobic man, the fact that women date chauvinistic men proves that such logic doesn't apply to reality.

Friday, July 15, 2011

Masculine to Masculine

When people see me with a bioguy lover, the few who say something will say one of two things:

1) that I've turned straight

2) we might be two gay guys

The main difference between those groups is that 1 sees sex and 2 sees gender expression. Group 1 perceives "opposite sexes" (and don't know that phrase makes no sense) and expects certain behaviors - like I secretly loathe my lover and just want him to buy me things. They also, usually, can't resolve my queerness with my "heterosexuality;" apparently I must choose one or the other.

What Group 1 can't see but Group 2 can is that the people to whom I'm attracted are usually masculine and that I'm rather masculine. In addition to just basic attraction, I relate more to masculine people. One thing that I've noticed recently is that most of the guys I get along with best have only brothers. Guys with sisters tend to be more protective of me rather than challenging, and I hate being protected.
Anyway, Group 2 is a bit closer to reality. They see gender expression, which is a facet of an individual. Biological sex has no inherent meaning or value, therefore judging a relationship on it ignores the true value of the people involved.

There are some queer people who are in Group 1, which is very disappointing. The queer community has been fighting for decades to be accepted for/despite "same sex" relationships. And now that I have "opposite sex" lovers, some queer people are giving me the same shit they've been given. It's frustrating! And a few can't/won't see that we're in the same predicament!

What those poor misguided queers and Group 1 see are "opposite sexes" and privilege. Yes, there are L.U.G.s (Lesbian Until Graduation) who give up their queerdom to live a "normal" life of straight privilege. That is not me! The people of Group 1 who assume my hatred of my lovers expect me to be like all the breeder women who'd rather be in a miserable relationship than contentedly single. And they do so because they get privileges by being in relationships with breeder men.
And I don't even want a relationship!

Saturday, July 9, 2011

Things I've Learned

- As an increasingly masculine person, I'm primarily attracted to masculine people. People who balance masculinity, not macho people. Because I must relate to a person I'm gonna date and I tend to relate more to masculine people, I date masculine people. There are a handful of feminine people to whom I'm physically attracted, but that's about it. Believe me, I respect femmes and I'm ecstatic that they're around, just not my cup of tea.
subnote: in industrial/blue collar environments,the people to whom I'm attracted are usually butch lesbians. Butches and industry go hand-in-hand, meanwhile most of the straight men there are macho. This is one of the things I miss most about Wisconsin! Chicago has been commercial for decades so the very qualities to which I'm attracted in butch lesbians occur more often in straight guys here. People look at the F on my driver's license and assume that I'm straight in Chicago but a lesbian in Wisconsin. They don't see my masculinity interacting with the masculinities of people in different cultures.

- I would love to learn more about BDSM but have yet to find a free, SAFE environment in which to do so. Recently, there was an offer for a private play party...but my discomfort outweighed my curiosity. I didn't know the people involved well enough and this would have taken place somewhere I don't know. Call me a wuss, but my safety can't be compromised. With regards to that intimacy, I'd rather be a safe wuss than brave with regrets.

- Because I'm non-monogamous, a lot of people assume that my two lovers and other dates are all needed to fulfill some voracious appetite. That is nice, yes, but that's not the motivation. If I meet someone great and we start dating/sexing/loving/etc. and then I meet another great person, I shouldn't have to choose between them. Why not both? And then people are extra-baffled that everyone involved knows about each other, but I've already written about that.

- Combining masculinity with safety, being upfront is great! Though it may be nerve-wracking and you're taking a huge risk, it's usually best to just come out and say "hey I like you, whaddaya say?" Chances are that person didn't even know! It sucks to get turned down, yes, but at least there's closure.

Saturday, July 2, 2011

Thoughts on Sex Drive and Mono/Polyamory

I was thinking about the stereotype of gay men who have open relationships. It's a stereotype because it's usually true. There's this idea that men have a higher sex drive and a lower value on codependence, so two men together would mess around with others. This is usually the case in reality.
But what does that mean about straight men? That they're somehow supposed to rein it in because women supposedly have a lower sex drive and a higher value on codependence? That sounds like a bum deal to me.

A lot of women don't have a lower sex drive until they're on The Pill. Granted, The Pill doesn't have the same effect on all women; but you can't deny the fact that a lot of women take it IN ORDER TO lower their libido (alright you can deny this if you didn't know already). They wouldn't do that if they didn't have a high libido, right?

Now that I've been living it up poly and seen how normal people - and some abnormal people! - can't wrap their minds around this lifestyle and I've been studying human sexuality and heard so many women bitching about their boyfriends wanting sex more than them (because they were on The Pill IN ORDER TO want less sex), I've got this idea that women are socially pressured to idealize monogamy more than men. Not a conspiracy, just that it's a cultural standard that most people don't usually question. Here are all these women who fight their own bodies in order to maintain monogamy. Economic property and jealousy are really the only things that keep us valuing monogamy, there's nothing biological to drive us to monogamy. And all these people think that I'm insane to have two lovers who know about each other, and that I keep dating others.

What really shocks people is that both of my lovers know that each other exists, that they know that I go on dates with other people as well, and that my lovers are free to date others too. The open honesty is what shocks people. We all agree that it would be cheating to keep a new sexual partner secret; open honesty makes safe sex safer. But people are shocked and confused that everybody involved knows about everybody else.
What these confused people don't realize is this: if I kept my lovers secret, people wouldn't be confused. Whether or not they approve, cheating makes sense to people. Cheating implies a value on monogamy, at least the appearance of it. My libido would be absolved (until someone recommends The Pill to lower it...) through the facade of monogamy.

I wonder how people would act were I a man, though.

Friday, July 1, 2011

Citizens Upholding Noisy Titillation

First, a refresher from The Vagina Monologues:

This was my story. Well, not the lawyer part (though I'd gladly take her as a sugar mama). But I, too, used to "hide my moan" with a couple unappreciative lovers and in some primly proper residences. Sex was far less enjoyable; it's one thing to choose to be quiet because it adds a sneaky quality to how naughty you're being, teehee, and quite another to be told "if you don't quiet down, I'm going to stop." The silence of these dorms and apartment buildings was something to conform to, right? Don't disturb it, even if it is 9pm on a Saturday.

I assistant-managed a production of The Vagina Monologues at my internship, shortly before graduation. My relationship at the time was also faltering and it ended about a month after I graduated. These three coinciding events inspired me to throw off the weight of imposed silence. Although it was sad to no longer be held in awe in the dorm, at least I didn't have to worry about disturbing someone's homework (what could turn you off more?). No more would I be silenced, I would proclaim my lover's skill - and sex got a lot better with this noisy liberation!

Those of us who appreciate loud sex must band together. Good sex makes a happier world and if you can't hear it happening, how do you know it's happening at all? Make the world a happier place by joining Citizens Upholding Noisy Titillation.
Step 1: have loud sex
Step 2: cheer on the loud sex you overhear
That's all it takes to become a Citizen of C.U.N.T. We want to hear Noisy Titillation in the apartments and houses we pass, in the dressing rooms of where we shop, under the tables of restaurants, and in the parks. A society in which people are getting laid is a happy society.
Join the Citizens Upholding Noisy Titillation group on facebook - t-shirts and buttons to appear in the near future!