before sexuality became so defined, no matter which it means, for mine or in general, i don't think this is a question. anyway, toby's email reminded me too much of my recent conversation with marcia and i think toby's question can become more interesting if i ask in the opposite way:
i don't know you feel different between queer or non-queer guy. that's interesting, i mean, is it so easy to determine gayness? i am still wondering if some of my friends are queer or not, those w/o and w/ girlfriends.
it seems that it is too easy to give an answer: everyone is queer. anyhow, the point i want to make is that it is always straight guy like to draw the definition, not queer, although maybe queer discovers the difference a bit earlier. also, in fact, which i believe, everyone likes the same sex to some extents. it is no harm. just the matter of an unknown fear in all of us and this makes us never follow our hearts.
i wanted to answer toby by telling him it is always difficult for me to hang around with a punch of straight straight guys. too many girls in those conversations. however, i can't. obviously, gay friends always talk too much about the boy(friend)s too. so, is this a common character of man. i don't believe this discomfort only comes from the difference in object of affection cos both can make me feel sick actually. i guess it may be about the desire of possession. nevertheless, i can't tell whether i feel stronger in man man man conversation. go ask girls!!
back to the question of how to distinguish, why one eye sight can tell. i answered nobuo once. i guess everyone check others for whatever reason. this is an instinct. perhaps, queers have one more tag on the script: if ... is gay; then ... ; else; ... and the mutual recognition may not cause by some specific items, like earring, or that kind of bullshit, but the clash of two extra tags. remember, it's almost like pre-programmed, like someone like to check the breast. and somehow, we are able to feel how others are checking us, right?
i am not sure but this is a not interesting, perhaps still, question, for some straight guys: why don't they have that tag? and some women have? why are they so special?
Posted by jamsen at July 18, 2004 05:27 PMhey, my question is (almost) the same as yours, but you say you're more interesting. So unfair :)
I'm not sure if 'straight straight' guys' conversations are always about girls. do you mean 'stupid' guys?
I am not sure about the tag theory (it sounds almost like an identification statement!) I guess you mean a more general thing about human sensitivity and communication. i.e. Similar/different "realisation" happens in any contact of 2 subjects, S&G, G&G, S&L, L&L, .... also straight cat and gay man... But we are the "subject" in this era and we are asked the question - "how?", so this tag becomes more in the limelight I guess- more mysterious and yet interest arousing. btw, we make mistakes... funny/lovely mistakes, right? If queerness is without a reflexive value, how queer could it be?
Posted by: Steven at July 19, 2004 11:01 PMabout the straight or gay issues, i am always puzzied. i mean i am NOT confused by the rither gay or straight, and how they identify one and other but the KIND of conversations, jamsen, toby and steven have. the presummed ways of identifications or indentities (though not a rigid sexual ID) that are possible BECAUSE the world is supposed to have only gay and straight.
in a way some points that jamsen wrote are already overiding the binary system.
for me, as a BI, i always look into eyes of boys and girls, and i found straight girls and boys talk and also gay men talk very hard to bear... so...
the point is why we asked such questions in the first place... if it must review some ideas of ourself and also the society...
take care
Posted by: anson at July 26, 2004 05:36 PM