@201(Crinoline), I think it's the culture that creates the expectation of this being an insult (hypothesis: probably via the following sequence of 'thoughts' [not in real time]: 'he's interested in me' > 'I'm not interested in him' > 'he's hitting on me' > 'he's thinking I might be interested in him' > 'but I would never be interested in him (I have better taste than that)' > 'he's underevaluating my taste' > 'that's not a compliment'. For some of your friends, this (the suggestion they might have such poor taste as to fall for that guy) apparently would even be offensive.

Such reactions vary from culture to culture -- in Brazil, as I once described to nocutename, women frequently expected / are socially expected to expect / participate in a social game whereby the number of guys who pay attention to them (flirt, approach and start talking, hit on) are like points in a game: the more you get, the more fun you're having. Many would construe such advances as compliments (or perhaps better as tributes) and would feel sad if no unwanted attention was given.

I think nothing of this is 'inherently' offensive or non-offensive. There should in principle be nothing wrong or offensive with asking a woman for sex (or vice-versa), and with her refusing or accepting the offer; but given the social meaning of sex ('attraction', 'beauty', 'power', etc.) it is not difficult to see these things taking on additional meanings.

@204

Yeah I think a homophobic man is more likely to be offended that someone thought he was gay under any circumstances.

But I don't really know any homophobic guys? So I'm guessing that based on mostly TV and etc.

@202(mydriasis), I admit I have never seen a lesbian bar either. I've seen a few gay bars, but not a lesbian one. (But then again, this may very well be bacause I'm not really into bars, not the way most straight people are.)

Are they different from gay bars? Perhaps if the strategies for approaching desirable strangers are different, straight women would feel more comfortable there than a straight man would in a gay bar.

@206, I grew up in a very homophobic environment, in which straight men (well, 18-year-olds) would get together to go 'throw rotten eggs at the gays' as a matter of course, without anyone being offended, or in which things like how bad gays are were part of the common language. Playing pranks on gays would fit nicely in their mindset.

It would be interesting to see how different American homophobia and Brazilian homophobia were. There is an element of sincerity in American discrimination or prejudice ('I'd never accept a member of that group!') that is usually missing in Brazil, were people like to pretend everything is OK even when it isn't (even if they hate a group, they sort of make it seem like a joke most of the time, not really so serious, etc.).

We have had straight male regular posters on past threads who have been in gay environments and gloated about how often the gays hit on them. It was not so much a question of fooling the gays or passing for gay as meeting the presumably ultra-high Gay Standard - "I'm SO hot that even this connoisseur of studliness would pick ME out of this large crowd" or something like that. The experience was just a pure ego boost, and the reaction one of sheer vanity, unconcerned for the natives who'd approached.

I suppose that's less objectionable than tricking people. And I'm not terribly pleased with my original comparison to women in gay bars not wanting to turn them into straight bars, as obviously a straight man in a lesbian bar would presumably not get ego strokes from people in whom he wouldn't be interested. Of course, in my time, women's spaces were fewer and farther between, and it was generally considered not a nice thing to do for unescorted men of any sexuality to venture into one.

Ankylosaur, I'm begging you to stop with the "it would be interesting to see" line of thought you're starting; we are all still healing from the pedophile one.

A lot of your surmises seem awfully offensive, and many fairly naive. I know you're not intending to offend, but comments like "It would be interesting to see how different American homophobia and Brazilian homophobia were. There is an element of sincerity in American discrimination or prejudice ('I'd never accept a member of that group!') that is usually missing in Brazil, were people like to pretend everything is OK even when it isn't (even if they hate a group, they sort of make it seem like a joke most of the time, not really so serious, etc.)." which just followed the item that a fun teenage practice is to throw rotten eggs at people, or even a dismissal of almost all people but yourself, as in "I'm not really into bars, not the way most straight people are" (from #207) are presumptuous and irritating.

"American" homophobia takes lots of appearances, as I'm sure does Brazilian homophobia. Different individuals do what they do for all sorts of complicated reasons.

208- Ankylosaur-- "Straight 18 year olds would get together to throw rotten eggs at gays without anyone getting offended."

Really? It was all fun and games and the gays didn't mind, no different from getting challenged to a game of ping pong?

No, don't answer that. I don't want to know. If you told me that it was really the case, if you had 30 of those gay guys with the rotten eggs still dripping from their hair here to testify as to how much they liked it, I still wouldn't believe you.

@Crin

I don't think he meant to include the victims in the "anyone". I assumed he was wryly referring to the fact that no one was disturbed by this behaviour.

I guess I was projecting.

@Ankyl

I'm straight and I hate bars. I've never noticed a difference in the amount of bar preference in straight vs. gay/lesbian populations. So I'm not sure what you were getting at with the 'not in the way other straight people are' thing?

Off the top of my head I can think of one very popular lesbian bar in my city. I've never been (at night, I went with a friend who was applying) but I've never been to a gay bar either.

@Ven

Yeah I never bought into that whole 'gay men have higher standards' stereotype. I know a lot of gay guys that actually have such a hardon for straight guys that they appear to have lower standards for straight men. Especially if they're 'stereotypically' straight (construction workers, etc). Gay guys tend to take care of themselves better than straight guys (on average) but that's not the same as having higher standards. Whatever strokes the ego though, I guess.

@211 (Crinoline) and 212 (mydriasis):
I initially read that the way Crinoline did, but quickly changed my interpretation to one closer to mydriasis', without giving him the benefit of the doubt as far as the "wryness" goes. Either way, I find it insulting, as it looks like the prelude to a "let's look at homophobia and its resultant acts as specific cultural phenomena." Much like last week's pedophilia thread, I think this is going to unleash hurtful, useless, and offensive stuff, under the heading of "theorizing."

@203(Ank) I was lucky enough to find The One, after I left a five-year marriage in which I was at times content, but often just bored - because I'd settled. He was there, and I thought I wouldn't find anyone better. After a childhood of abuse, it's probably patently obvious why I might think that. When your arguments for a guy have "Well, he doesn't hit me" near the top, it might not be meant to be. He was a great guy - just not the one for me, as close as I thought he came.

When The One came into my life, it was like an oasis after a years-long stretch of desert. Lots of people don't believe in The One, and neither did I until I met him. They can be like unicorns.

@Crinoline, @nocutename... Please calm down.

I'm not defending such practices. Mydriasis above got it quite right. As I observed once, I'm quite critical of Brazilians and their belief they have no prejudice.

It is somewhat surprising that you took what I wrote to mean that I somehow approved of that, or that I thought the gays didn't mind. Of course they did, of course I did (and at that time I was still quite afraid of gays), and of course what those young men did (and bragged about, as if this were OK) was quite shameful and horrible. Maybe something in what I wrote suggested the opposite; if so, I apologize.

But please: don't jump to conclusions. I've written about anti-gay prejudice before, and I always condemned it. I've cheered as gay marriage got closer; I've commented on the IGP project and reactions to it with approval; I've shared thoughts on the problems of equality and stereotypes, and how to get rid of them. I've done this in this very comment thread. Please don't forget that. We may disagree on one topic, but this does not invalidate all other comments on all other topics.

@214, I don't see why you find it insulting. Homophobia is a problem, and understanding how it works is a step towards becoming able to resolve it. Comparing it across cultures shows things that are (or aren't) inherent to it.

Nobody has ever gained much from knowing less, rather than more, about the problems they'd like to solve.

I can understand it if you don't find prejudice a topic worthy of discussion; maybe you prefer other things.

What saddens me, though, is how quick you are to attribute evil intent to me. No 'benefit of the doubt'... Sigh...

No, ankylosaur, once again, you misunderstand me, although I think I understood you. I was aware that you were not approving of Brazilian homophobic bullying tactics. I was just hoping to forestall a thread in which you start on the "isn't it interesting" aspects of comparing cultural practices and wondering why they exist, this time in regards to gay-bashing.

@215, my impression is that people are more or less compatible. And it does happen that two people are very compatible, to such an extent that the feeling you mention is generated. Sometimes almost immediately, almost 'at first sight'; sometimes the feeling grows over a certain period of time, till we are surprised (without being really surprised) that it is there, maybe had always been there (who knows?). The latter is what happened to me.

But from what I see around myself, this is not the most frequent situation. And people can, and do, develop quite deep relationships, despite the fact that the feeling of 'The One' was not present.

Love has many forms, and many faces.

@211(Crinoline), you wouldn't have to. They would never do that. It is simply not true.

Sigh!...

Sorry if my pragmatics somehow misled you into thinking that I approve of that, or even that Brazilians in general do (especially now, that things have changed appreciably; notice that I was referring to a period over 30 years ago, when things were much worse there as in the US). I am quite critical of Brazilians, but I don't want to make them look worse than they are.

@217: I don't attribute evil intent to you. In fact, I give you the benefit of the doubt in thinking that you're not trying to be offensive, when you are.

@218, OK.

@221, indeed I'm not. I have no reason to want to offend anyone here (or anywhere for that matter). If I do seem offensive, simply point that out to me, and tell me why it seems offensive, and I'll set things straight.

@213(mydriasis), I wasn't thinking of a difference between straights and gays in that respect. It's simply that I'm a straight man, and most other straight men I know like to go to bars. I was thinking of me as the odd one in the set.

@209(MrVen),@213(mydriasis), so is there a stereotype whereby gays are supposed to be better arbitrers of 'studliness' and 'manliness'? Why should they be better at that than straight women?

Ankylosaur-- What part of "without anyone getting offended" did I misunderstand? Who did "anyone" refer to? It is only because I *am* giving you the benefit of the doubt that I ask.

Ms Driasis - I am very tempted to say that straight chasers get what they deserve and deserve what they get, but I won't. It might be nice if Mr Savage didn't favour them, but he must do as he will.

I'm in general agreement about standards.

Mr Ank @225 - Do you really instinctively get the effort required by women, even Mrs Ank, to maintain themselves at the standard of beauty of their choosing?

Straight women might appreciate hot men as much as gay men do, but gay men also spend much effort and energy trying to be hot men as well. Now, I am no connoisseur of the sort of straight man I describe, but there's the additional thrill of beating out people who try to embody what they desire.

Besides, just logistically, it's about twice the accomplishment being hit upon in gay surroundings as it is in straight surroundings of the same total attendance.

Mr Ank - My own version of #210 is that your idea of looking at some social phenomenon seems to be to present as a scientist wanting to put us all - or at least some of us - under the microscope. It can be quite irritating to be treated as a specimen. I also suspect that you might not inherently be especially scrupulous about avoiding triggering.

You may recall I once asked if you'd mind using for a parallel example you were making a particular taste that didn't happen to be common to many people on the board. This is similar.

There are some areas where it would just be the kind course of action to let a member of a group be the driver of a sensitive discussion in which members of that group are the people primarily affected by the phenomenon discussed.

@Ank

Yeah, Ven mostly got it.
I didn't say that I agreed with it, simply that it was a stereotype (that someone else brought up earlier). Pretty much, gay men typically have a more put-together (well dressed, in shape, etc) pool to pick from than straight women... percentage wise. In sheer numbers we probably still get the lion's share IMO.

Personally I have obscenely high standards but I prefer more model-pretty types, less manly-rugged types.

Re: straight chasers. Yeah I think that depends on the environment. I know at work the gay men love to lay it on thick with the straight guys - especially if it makes them awkward. Some of them are flattered though, for sure. I think if I lived in a different place, being a straight chaser would be a lot less amusing.

@226: "Anyone" in that sentence referred to the people who usually would mind if other people were wickedly attacked or mocked, but who failed to do so in the case of gays, because they had anti-gay prejudice.

A similar example: consider the sentence "the prisoners managed to escape from the prison without anyone noticing them". Of course, they, the prisoners who escaped, did notice that they had escaped; in this sentence, 'anyone' has scope over all other people, but not the prisoners themselves. Pragmatically speaking, it also refers only to the relevant people who should have noticed (e.g., the guards); even though in principle 'anyone' would also cover those people in Taiwan who also failed to notice the escape of the prisoners (since they were too far away), this is only trivially true, but not pragmatically so (i.e., it's not relevant to what the speaker was trying to communicate).

Likewise, in my comment, the word 'anyone' was meant to include neither irrelevant people (those who weren't there) nor the ones who obviously would mind (those who were hit with eggs). That's how I thought it would be understood.

In addition to that, since such a situation should of course cause protests, and yet it didn't, it was also meant as a criticism of the people who didn't protest against that. Just as a description of anti-gay bullying in an American school "without anyone protesting" would probably be understood as a criticism of those who didn't protest.

@228, yes, Mr Ven, I do.

I see your point; and yet I would have expected straight men to expect straight women to be better dectetors of who the 'studliest' or 'manliest' men were. I suppose I could see straight men imagining gays as better connoisseurs of what makes a straight man attractive, but it does take some effort.

@229, that was also my final version of #210, hence my answer @224.

I would add, though, that often enough the problem with the microscope is what is imagined to be behind it, not under, its lenses.

I dumped a hipster douche who was endlessly judgmental about music taste, and I couldn’t be happier without him. I don’t think ST is the one who’s settling if they get married.

@213 mydriasis: It sounds like we have several things in common: we're both straight and hate bars. I don't mind dining alone if I'm by myself, but absolutely loathe the feeling of being hit on while I'm trying to eat.
Maybe it's because I'm pre-menopausal, I don't know.

Guys old enough biologically to be my dad are hitting on me, lately, and it's freaking me out! Defund Viagra!!!!!

@235

Sounds like it!

Personally, I'm indifferent to whether or not I'm eating - I care more about who's doing the hitting-on. Someone above mentioned that some people are offended by getting hit on by people they see as somewhat... not in their league. I'll admit I'm enough of a douche to have this reaction. I'll keep it to myself and be polite, unless the person's persistant, in which case I can be quite unpleasant.

Premenopausal sounds like a very confusing term. How is it different from perimenopausal? What does that make people my age? Pre-pre-menopausal? Confusing...

Also, Ank, did you say you were a prof somewhere?

@ 198- I agree.... Settle? my ass!! Life is WAYYYYYY too short to spend with someone who is settlin' for you. He states she is 'superhot' so I am sure she is turning down 'dick' left and right to be with this charmer!! I hope she has good gut feelings and reads this immature asshole like a children's book!

Here's to my flaws and all!!

Mr Ank - I agree about what "anyone" meant, but you do see what your use of the word, even under a benign interpretation does - it erases the victims by excluding them from the "anyone" who didn't mind. And surely we ought to centre the victims, ought we not?

@ 198 and 240 There is nothing wrong with being sure of herself before she commits to her girlfriend. Not enjoying their time together doesn't make her immature, these things happen. Some minor things are deal breakers and some aren't, it depends on the person.
I think they should break up. I also think ST is cool to consider this now before they get married or something and she breaks the woman's heart.

@236: Hmmm...perimenopausal? Premenopausal? I think that's the same thing, isn't it?

@242 Lord Domly,

Due to a crash and burn dumping I got out of a relationship, I came up with a "rule" before I asked my girlfriend to marry me: I should be 70-80% sure I wanted to marry. If I couldn't think of reasons to NOT marry was a red flag that I really shouldn't, because I had to be ignoring/denying something.

We all have infatuations, and they can feel great while they're happening, BUT they aren't based in reality (usually). And they probably aren't fair to your SO; who wants to have to be perfect? Everyone is imperfect, and having the freedom to screw up and be human should be a part of every relationship, up to a point. The other side of that coin is having the sense we would have to be perfect ourselves to match our "perfect being". If that isn't a major red flag, then heartache awaits.

Peace.

@239, yes, indeed, in the Netherlands. Why?

@241, I think it is important to give victims their voice back; to give them support, to show we know that nothing of this is their fault, help them acquire the mechanisms -- legal, cultural, or otherwise -- whereby they can reclaim and ultimately enjoy their personhood without fear. I see Brazilian activist groups doing that: protesting against attacks (the 'Homocausto'), by reporting individual cases, by interviewing the victims and voicing their concerns.

My interest in that post, however, was indeed the perpetrators -- because... how can we do more than palliative work without understanding the causes of the problem? And, in the case of homophobia, the cause certainly isn't the victims, but the homophobes. If we don't address this, how can we effectively fight for change?

One of the benefits of Dan's IGBP, as someone pointed out in another comment thread here, I think, is that it made a number of mums suddenly feel empathy: those young boys and girls were committing suicide, and even something like recorded videos about how things get better later on could change that for many of them. Suddenly it got to their heart: gays were not simply those guys on a gay pride parade with some nebulous "agenda", they were boys and girls committing suicide because of bullying.

Those mums who didn't use to care were, well, homophobic -- like the people who did nothing in my example. But their homophobia was fragile: it could be shattered by the perception of gays as something other than that stupid stereotypes. Not all homophobia is like that -- and I wonder why, and what could similarly shatter it.

If we ignored hate, its causes and the reason why it mesmerizes so many people, we end up allowing it to grow. Hate is dangerous.

And it's not like Brazil hasn't seen progress. Sen. Martha Suplicy (PT - Worker's Party) is proposing to criminalize homophobia in B…, encouraging discussion in the Senate's Human Rights Committee. Also, 63,7% of Brazilians are now favorable to gays serving openly in the Brazilian military. 63,7%! In a country that was throwing eggs at gays in the early 80s as a matter of course! (In all fairness, though, this was in my city, which is pretty conservative, different from Rio or São Paulo.) In a country where evangelicals have such strong influence! What caused this change, and how can we make sure this change goes on?

@240, wendykh's story above about the girl who didn't settle for the wrong reasons and came later to regret that does make it clear that it may be difficult to know, though.

Sometimes people end relationships over things that aren't really a good cause for it to end, just as sometimes people continue in relationships for reasons that also aren't worth it.

As long as you're OK with accepting the consequences, and perhaps the regret, in the long run, I say do follow your heart. Just don't forget that there are no certainties. Just as you may live to be happy you didn't settle, you may also live to be sad you let that one escape. Be ready to deal with such possibilities.

Mr Ank - I wish I had time for a proper reply. I'm not saying, Don't Look at the Perpetrators, but an approach that centres them so often comes out looking appeasenik, and may run the risk of leading to change that everyone but the victims themselves thinks will make the victims' lives so much better.

RE: The straight guy in a gay bar post -
I'm also a 25 year old straight guy, and go to gay bars all the time with my gay friend and my gay cousin. I asked them what the etiquete was, and the conclusion we have arrived to basically is "gay guys can figure out pretty quick that you're straight/not looking for anything (if that's the case) if you just act yourself like you would anywhere else, so don't even worry about it."

I've actually had many guys come up to me to tell me how much they respected me for being "comfortable enough" to be there, and asked if I wanted them to hook me up with any straight lady friends who were there.

I prefer gay bars, in many ways - they can be far less hostile environments, the drinks are often cheaper and/or stronger, and the gays are great fun to go drinking with. Like drinking with a bunch of rowdy sailors or something. Ass slapping and all sometimes. It happens.

Basically, this ( coprophilia, etc ) is infantile sexuality. You can revel in it, or you can grow up. The choice is yours.

There's a site - luvlinens.com where I've bought what we call "prag-mats" (because they are mats and they are oh-so-practical for the purpose). They come in washable and disposable.

When we travel, we take the disposable ones. No fuss, no muss, just toss away.

Much better than towels or messing up sheets.

Hope this helps.

Karen

(Ank) What do you teach?

Love me some Savage. How about a "like" button up in this bitch?

#250, I can't blame you for accepting your gay friends' driving invites. I blame the gay guys who are bringing you there. For some reason, they think it's a validation to have a straight guy with them in a gay bar. And by offering to be your wingman with whatever straight girl is there, they're helping turn the place into a straight bar.

I see the same thing happen with gay guys who bring their straight girlfriends (aka "fag hags") to gay bars. It starts off cool enough, but eventually the buzz changes.

The comment I made earlier (#191) about how the transition happens wasn't theoretical. It happened exactly that way to a gay friend of mine in, of all places, San Francisco. The details will vary, of course, but the path I described is well worn.

I can't stop any of it from happening, but I can at least lament it. The idea that "everyone's cool" in Seattle is complete, unadulterated bullshit. Yes, even here, there are plenty of situations where straight guys don't want to be hit on by gay guys, and conversely, when gay guys aren't comfortable with straights screwing up the energy, even if they don't intend to.

But, again, I can't get too pissed at you, at least if I accept your account at face value. The issue is with the clueless gay guys who are inviting you. Something tells me that it's been an awfully long time since any of them seriously put the moves on anyone in a bar.

Which, now that I'm on the subject, is another issue with Seattle. I don't know, and can't say that I care, how the straight singles bar scene works here, but the gay bar scene is increasingly a complete dud when it comes to cruising.

To put it succinctly: If you want to scare a New Yorker, point a gun at him. If you want to scare a gay guy in a bar in Seattle, say hi to him. So maybe these final acts of dilution don't matter anyway. By the time gay guys are inviting every straight person they know to come to a gay bar with them, the action has moved elsewhere.

Drink up, I guess.

@255(mydriasis), linguistics (specifically historical-comparative linguistics, though I often teach intro courses).

@248(MrV), I agree with that. Do I concentrate that often on perpetrators? I seem to recall a number of posts (on other topics) that center on victims' experiences, especially my own. But if indeed I concentrate too often on perpetrators, then I'm sorry. That was not my intention.

Ank,

I don't know much about linguistics, but the vague impression I get from friends who study (and teach) closer to that realm of academia tend to have spent time learning more about sociological/anthro/cultural/etc than the average person (or even a different kind of student such as myself). You're used to looking at things in a certain way and I think that you might just sometimes forget about the level of detachment/desensitization you have compared with the general population.

At least personally, I know that what I study has made me desentisizeed to a lot of things that other people often get bothered by (blood/death/disease/parasites/feces/urine etc, etc etc). I have definitely messed up and said the odd thing while someone was eating, for example. Profs of mine say things all the time that would probably either disgust someone outside the field or would be seen as horribly insensitive/callous. But you become desensitized studying these things, and you have to study things to treat them or cure them.

Anyway, I might be way off base, it was just the impression I got.