Left Behinds

The anti-andrewsullivan.com. Or, the Robin Hood (Maid Marian?) of bright pink Blogger blogs.

Monday, March 20, 2006

Androphilia is the new gay

Some blogger is writing a book about "androphilia," which he defines as "A sexual love and friendly affection experienced by adult men for adult men, the physical condition of maleness, and the expression of masculinity." Protest too much there, Mary? (heh it's fun using queeny slang from the 1950s)

Supposedly the words "gay" and "homosexual" are celebrations "of perpetual victimhood, effeminacy, and feminist gender theory." As I just said to him, maybe he should stick to “swashbucking ass pirate” (another of his constructions). Something about “androphile” is a bit ... gay.

First of all, could that cover be any campier? Has a fedora ever been as queeny? It's funny how the ass pirates most preoccupied with their masculinity are never very masculine at all. They open their mouths and it's inevitably Big Gay Al, not Ennis Del Mar.


Sometimes I feel like I don't write about gayness enough, but I just don't see what's so interesting about gayness that I should think about it all the time. Isn't my decade-and-a-half of service to the community (ba-dum-bump) enough of a contribution?

UPDATE:

So I left a couple comments on that guy's blog, one of which was "Why are you so concerned about stereotypes? Handle it like a real man — don’t even think about it." That last bit was meant to be a (somewhat dry I suppose) joke, but he took it at face value and replied

Gay men have such a sad and limited lowbrow understanding of masculinity. They jerk off to hypermasculine images religiously, and idolize straight men sexually, but regularly display open animosity toward the concept of manhood. There’s no middle ground between the blue collar thug and preening faggot. It never occurs to them that men invented things like philosophy, rational discourse, the symphony, the novel, or, well–virtually everything else.

First off, I'll forgive him for assuming I'm monosexual. But this is the second time today I've been accused by a stranger of being a man-hater (slightly better than when the official at NOW accused me of being a misogynist because of this). Isn't there at least a touch of misogyny to Herr Androphile's ode to the accomplishments of Man? I can think of a couple contributions from women to world history and culture.

But be that as it may, the surest proof that Miss Manly is the faggiest fagola in Fagville is the insecure, bitchy way he responded to my anodyne little comments. Only an anxious gay would take such disproportionate offense. Oh look, I'm doing it, too. The difference being, I don't deny acting like a bitchy queen from time to time. I think most people would consider me pretty "straight-acting" (skate-acting?), but I love my inner bitchy queen. She's fun.




Tags:,,, ,

26 Comments:

  • At 8:31 PM, Blogger Antid Oto said…

    As that kid from Third Rock from the Sun said in "Mysterious Skin": "I hate it when they look like Tarzan and sound like Jane." Of course, he let Wilford Brimley blow him, so his taste has to be considered suspect.

     
  • At 9:53 PM, Anonymous Jack Malebranche said…

    "I hate it when they look like Tarzan and sound like Jane."

    I love that quote. Because I hate it, too.

    Though the idea that all homos who look like Tarzan are really Jane inside is little more than a reassuring bedtime story for queens who are threatened by the possibility that all homosexuals are not really girls inside.

     
  • At 9:59 PM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said…

    Damn, I always forget that the people I make fun of I mean write about check their incoming links.

    Anyhow, I'm not anxious enough about my masculinity to defend it. But sorry, I'm sure you're the manliest ass-pirate in manland. I was just speaking of the general trend.

     
  • At 10:09 PM, Blogger Antid Oto said…

    That's funny, the people I make fun of never seem to check their incoming links.

     
  • At 11:19 PM, Anonymous Jack Malebranche said…

    But sorry, I'm sure you're the manliest ass-pirate in manland.

    Uh...the pirate thing was supposed to be a joke, too...

    And I responded to the rest of that on my blog.

    I know you love your inner bitch and all, but making civilized, apologetic comments on my blog and then popping back to your blog and calling me the faggiest fagola in Fagville is kind of trashy, even for a self-proclaimed bitch.

    And were my comments misogynistic? Or just....correct? Men really are responsible for more or less the entirety of Western Civilization. Have they been actively oppressing women all of that time? Sure. But that doesn't make their accomplishments null and void, and it doesn't invent a comparable history of women's accomplishments. Can you think of a couple? Sure. I can too. But to deny that men are responsible for the vast majority of Western achievements (or Eastern ones for that matter) is to live in a fantasy world. If you listened to most feminists and gay men talk these days, you'd think men were only responsible for war and oppression.

    Only an anxious gay would take such disproportionate offense and provoke such a catfight.

    Is this your first day on the Internet? Disproportionate offense and catfights are what run the so-called 'blogosphere.' It has nothing to do with me being an 'anxious gay man.'

    And...read what you wrote. I think 'disproportionate offense' is a little disingenuous. It's pretty obvious to any reader that you intended everything you wrote to be personally insulting. It's not like you wrote some sort of 'balanced review,' and I'm just making some sort of 'sour grapes' tirade.

     
  • At 11:53 PM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said…

    Btw, the only reason I blogged about your book is that I was intrigued by the title/neologism. It doesn't quite capture my experience, since I'm not usually attracted to men qua men so much as men qua some cool trait(s) of theirs. And from spending a bit of time on your blog I do think you and Andrew Sullivan write about a masculinity that to me at least seems imaginary (though your comments here would suggest otherwise). But, you know, I have an ambivalent relationship to the gay community(ies), and your shtick was interesting enough for me to read through your blog. You have my permission to use that as a quote for your publicity. LOL.

    But that muscle mary in the Fedora is still totally campy. In a good way.

     
  • At 11:58 PM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said…

    ALSO (jeez, you're getting a lot of my attention tonight), based on your gushy post about military porn and your comment about how I and other gay men supposedly "jerk off to hypermasculine images religiously and idolize straight men sexually," I think you and I have very, very, very different libidos and relationships to our masculinities.

    Dude, have you ever had sex with a straight guy? They're totally self-involved and don't know what the hell they're doing. I fantasize about that like I fantasize about Rosie O'Donnell.

     
  • At 11:58 PM, Anonymous Jack Malebranche said…

    No, seriously, read your initial post, before the update. The whole thing was making insulting assumptions about me and what I'm doing.

    It's not like I'm sitting here crying about it.

    I just made a general comment, no bitchier than your initial post, about people who make the sort of comments you made--because I anticipated these sorts of responses before I wrote a word of my book. And I've already had a few remarks like yours. They're par for the course.

    Anyway, there's really no reason to have some sort of geeky internet feud about it. But if you talk smack about me, and I have the time, sure--I'm going to respond.

    I just see this as an early opportunity to cut my teeth dealing with the sort of response I'm bound to see a lot more of. If I were really as insecure and afraid of criticism as you portray me to be, I wouldn't have made myself a target by starting this project, would I?

     
  • At 12:11 AM, Anonymous Jack Malebranche said…

    Btw, the only reason I blogged about your book is that I was intrigued by the title/neologism

    Actually, for the record, it's not a neologism. It's just seldom used. I definitely didn't make it up, though I did hijack it for my own purposes.

    It may not capture a lot of people's experiences. But I do think there are a lot of homos out there who are uncomfortable with the word gay because of all it evokes. Gay is used to describe sexuality, but it really seems to be more about identifying with a particular culture. So for people who aren't interested in that culture...it does suck to have to be associated with it all the time. It's like being constantly identified as a goth because you happen to have one dusty copy of a Bauhaus record that you haven't listened to in years. I think gay people should be able to run around being as gay as they like--but I don't think being gay or acting gay is necessarily linked to preferring men sexually. That's basically why I went hunting for a better word. Since 'andro' means 'man,' I thought it was a good contrast to the overtly effeminate 'gay' moniker.

     
  • At 1:15 AM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said…

    Hm, I guess people alighted on 'queer' for somewhat similar reasons.

    I suppose for me, I'm just not too bothered either way. I don't care if you think I'm gay, straight, bi, queer, two-spirited, androphilic, or vampiric. I just want you to think I'm thin.

    Sorry, that's a Sarah Silverman joke. I'm getting tired and my inner bitchy queen is out hunting for innocents or whatever she does when I go to sleep.

     
  • At 1:19 AM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said…

    I also refer you to related comments about gay identity from our co-blogger joancrawfordsface a week or so ago. He is much more eloquent than I.

     
  • At 1:26 AM, Anonymous Jack Malebranche said…

    Yeah, queer was OK - I relate it to William Burroughs, which is interesting, although I also relate it to lesbians with pink hair. But ultimately it's just 're-appropriating' a slur. I'm a weird guy, and I like being weird, but after a while I do get tired of being expected to know about women's hair and makeup just because I like men...(which has never made much sense to me.) Also, being weird has nothing to do with my sexuality per se. I like to keep sex about sex and culture about culture, personally. Two different animals. I'll check out the link you mentioned.

     
  • At 5:45 AM, Blogger Thom said…

    LGBTQQI - Lebian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Queer, Questioning, Intersexed. These are all the labels that are out there, and recognized by many.

    I often wonder where I fit in. I sleep with men who look/act/smell/carry themselves as men. I enjoy the company of angry lesbians when the world's got me down. I always was intrigued by those who took gender out of sexuality and treated both with an equal amount of interest. Queer folk are those who don't respond well to effeminite men, or masculine women, and rather reject being labeled anyway. Questioning is like tippy-toeing about one's identity. I can only imagine what the world looks like for a person with a female body and a male sexual organ...

    I think I'm with you, Jack, when you say I'm a weird guy, and I like being weird, but after a while I do get tired of ... women's hair and makeup. And who are the Queer Eye guys to tell me what a gay man should know, look like, dress like, and behave like?

    I also recognize the vapidity (sp?) of the gay man's culture, and how idolizing the thin, muscular, blonde 19 year-old with a disproportionatly sized penis, has not only created a value system that is hard for most to fit into, but also labeled all gay men as something they may not be - hungry sexual beasts in search of the next virgin male to ravish. As an up-and-coming teacher, this type of stereotypical thought is what I have to seek out and destroy in both my students, and with some of their parents. In fact, last week was a prime example of that for me.

    My students do not need to know what I do in my bedroom, but they do need to understand that not all people who identify themselves as gay or lesbian behave in a certain way, and not all of those who do identify as gay or lesbian (or any other moniker of the moment), fit the stereotypes that already exist. I will thank mass media, the news clips of freakish people marching in Pride Parades, Will and Grace , and Queer Eye for doing their bit to support a negative view of homosexuals.

    - Just another Frustrated Gay? Man

     
  • At 7:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I hope you realize that you look more ignorant on the School of Masculine Thought, and are completely impervious in your vision to realize that you make yourself sound like a broken record of the 1970s gay liberation movement that has done nothing but implant the ideology of the 'born gay' Stalinist.

    I am not very certain whether or not he was declaring a new Era of the 'New Gay', rather showing the fluidity and our limitation to understanding homosexuality and Gay culture as two separate entities. You should read Wayne Brekhus' book "Peacocks, Chameoleons, Centaurs: Gay Suburbia and the Grammar of Social Identity".

    Repeated exposure to a particular paradigm desentisizes and devalues the rest. Gay Radicals do not neccesarily lead for a 'progressive', because any Archaeologist and student of the Social Sciences will tell you that 'progress' is defined by the group 'doing' the defining.

     
  • At 9:01 PM, Anonymous Jack Malebranche said…

    Since this old discussion is weirdly at the top of my Google....I figured I'd note that Androphiia is finally out (through Amazon, Borders, Barnes & Noble, Powells, etc) and that the cover is much less random now.

     
  • At 5:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Yo! To the owner of this blog. Have you read Jack's book? It is actually good and makes a valid point. I do not like prissy, faggy men and I think we need to get away from that sterotype.

    --David

     
  • At 11:36 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I guess mental illness abounds here ... why on earth would anyone what to jump another hairy man's ass?

     
  • At 2:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Having read the book, I invite any of your readers to check out my review of it. This uber-queer pigeoning is as tired as the caddy banter surrounding it. Man up!

    Link to review: GLTimes Review of Androphilia

     
  • At 10:40 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Androphilia presents homosexual desire for tight ass gay bareback sex in men not as a fixed
    orientation, but as a sexual fetish or taste.
    Cameron Jackson rejects the gay moniker completely, using instead
    the term androphilia — literally, "the love of young gay preteen boys "
    — to specifically discuss the unique dynamic of sexual desire and brotherly love between adult men.

     
  • At 7:46 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "Being gay still means being effeminate to most people, and I think there
    must be a great deal of fear --as I think there is with many young men who
    decide they are bareback twinks thus attracted to other males--
    that this discovery of sexual preference is demands a sort of psychological
    castration. Manhood is very important to most men --it's a powerful thing--
    and gays and straights alike promote the idea that manhood and homosexuality
    are incompatible.

    Since homosexual men make up roughly 4 percent of the population the
    relatively small group of teen twinks have a limited audience with each other
    to fulfill needs women cannot. "It's a different kind of friendship, a
    unique dynamic that can be really rewarding in its own way." Male to male
    friendships, even outside of the homosexual realm, are different all together
    explained Malebranche. "Being able to relate to and bond successfully with
    other men is really important for most cute twinks; it gives them a sense of well-being and confidence.

     
  • At 11:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

  • At 9:20 AM, Anonymous Sildenafil Citrate said…

    well that definition of androphilia is pretty much so rather gay, why call it or put another name, gay is gay and that's it. If they want to sound sophisticated and say they are androphilians well that's another story

     
  • At 11:49 AM, Anonymous Viagra Online said…

    The gay movement is expanding quite fast, or they are just coming out of the closest, or many people are just turning gay, I hope it is the number one suggestion.

     
  • At 3:24 PM, Anonymous call forwarding said…

    Wonderful information. I will go to share this to my friends...

     
  • At 12:12 PM, Anonymous Model Baju Lebaran Terbaru 2015 said…

    I read a lot of stuff and i found that the way of writing to clearifing that exactly want to say was very good so i am impressed and I like to come again in future.

     
  • At 11:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    re: Jack Malebranche

    Yes, Sexism effects men who like men too. There's a great documentary about gay men and voice called "Do I Sound Gay?" in which he discusses the idea of gay male porn having hyper-masculine men in it and deeper voices and sports as a background to the foreplay. And I'd say 'bottom' culture has a weird implication that being a bottom is bad and being a top = good, sexual, dominant, 'manly.' When neither is manly. Or unmanly. It's just a position you're born into liking or find yourself liking//attracted to being in.

    I'm also pretty suspicious of a book that feels the need to carve away space for male friendship under a weird umbrella that seems to make it adversary to gay-male relationships....

    Almost like you don't think gay men have male friends outside of dating purposes, or have straight male friends who aren't homophobic and writing weird critiques on their sex life :I



     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

 
FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com