BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Male androgyny and, uh... 'polarity'.

 
 
Ganesh
20:50 / 10.04.02
I've been thinking recently about physical representations of erotic desire - probably because I've been visiting a wider range of 'fetish' clubs than usual (Torture Garden with Mordant & Lurid one night, XXL with ZoCher the next). I know I've touched on some of this before, but:

1) How come men who identify as bisexual are far more likely to have long hair than those who identify as homosexual (and probably heterosexuals too)?

2) Barbelith represents, for me, the single largest pool of men (and women) who identify as bisexual. I remember several IRL conversations where male beauty/desirability's been discussed and it's almost always been in terms of androgyny - pale, smooth, ectomorphic men in eyeliner - whereas almost all the gay men I know (say they) are more attracted to either overtly 'masculine' qualities (muscle bulk, body hair) or the ostensibly straight 'boy next door' archetype. Are bisexual men more likely to be attracted to androgynous body types? Does this explain the long hair thing?

3) Where do women (and I'm thinking of all you Barbe-slash writers) stand on this?
 
 
Ganesh
20:53 / 10.04.02
(Should've said Barbelith represents the single largest pool of bisexuals I know rather than - as is implied - 'in existence'...).
 
 
Imaginary Mongoose Solutions
21:37 / 10.04.02
Well, whether I quailify as bisexual could be a thread all by itself. However, what I do know is that the guys I am attracted to, when I am attracted to guys, all seem to be andogynous if not feminine. That said, I also swoon over women who while feminine, do often tend to andogynous themselves.

Me? Well, I have long hair, a goatee that I really would like to cut off someday, and sadly have a body that is apparently programmed for UBER-MANliness. Which, since my idea of personal beauty also goes towads andogynous, really irritates me.
 
 
Tom Coates
21:38 / 10.04.02
I like geeks. Does that count as 'boy next door'? Sorry to be so immediately flippant. I suppose I'm just trying to work out if I'm immediately demonstration my attraction outside the categories you described.
 
 
Ganesh
11:17 / 11.04.02
Ye-e-es, but from what I recall of your blog, Tom, you're into American geeks (Noah Wylie?) - which are somewhat removed from the UK version...
 
 
grant
15:01 / 11.04.02
Does the fact that I (like apparently a few other nominally "straight" boy posters) am really into boyish women (ah, the pixie cut! ah, the broad shoulders!) play into this?

Maybe bis are into playing with gender cues while gays and straights take them at (invisible) face value, as simple information rather than something more, uhh, performed/applied/played-with.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
15:07 / 11.04.02
...by the whole better health system/compulsory orthodontics/Biactol programme over there.

Interesting questions, 'nesh, and I'm going to take issue/take apart your questions slightly... pushed for time in netcaff so might havta come back...

How are you identifying 'identified' bi-sexual men? I know I always go on about this but in this case it's an important question. Are they men who stride around proclaiming their bisexuality, do they have 'one of each' dripping off each arm (actually, if you've got some indicators that definitely indicate bisexuality, can you let me in on 'em?) ? Are they people you've spoken to in meatspace? Given that the largest constituency of bisexuals you know are here this seems unlikely.

I could suggest that you're igorning all sorts of other style/subcultural distinction in drawing such a broad category, but to try and answer your questions...

hmm, because they're not applying either gay or striaght crude stereotypes of what a 'proper' man looks like? One being the camp reiteration of the other etc. etc....

Because if your sexuality is about the inbetween spaces/outside the polarity, androgynous presentation has its own attractions... And the desire to present according to what one feels is truest to one's own sexuality (bisexuality being in the odd space right now of benefiting in mays from queer theory's exploration of the shifting self, but needing, or feeling it needs a discourse of truth and legitimacy as 'appearing bisexual' is *so* problematical atm.) may result in a mixture of signifiers or a desire to distance self from both 'ends' of the spectrum. Especially as (speaking personally here) polarities and 'ends' have very little to do with bisexuality. So appearances/presentations that blur the lines, go somewhere other than 'male', are therefore attractive?

Because it's an easy (and strong though old-fashioned) signifier of non-masculinity/problematised masculinity?

Because they get nervous going into straight/gay barbers?

Hmm. as a bisexual woman, the type you've described pretty much does it for me... in an email discussion with a fellow Barbeloid a while ago, it occurred to me that my 'thing' if I have one, was/is atm, fucked about/problematised or perhaps more accurately complicated femininity, so certain types of women/men who fit into this: dykes of all kinds, very consciously feminist women of all kinds, especially those with complicated/conflicted rel.s to femininity, very feminised (androgynous)men/people of indeterminate gender...

Blathering about this as it might relate to what you identify as a preference for androgyny among bisexual men?

Love the idea of Barb. being 'the single largest pool of men and women who identify as bisexual'
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
15:17 / 11.04.02
oops, that first sentence was meant to follow on from 'nesh's last post.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
15:24 / 11.04.02
And yeah, think Grant's got a point. When I diverted in my point about bisexuality vacillating between the Queer theory stance and a politics of 'authenticity', think I was intending to suggest this tid in with the questions of visibility, presentation, and passing, come to that, which for bisexuals are incredibly difficult at this moment in time.

Possibly therefore context-driven, in that the 'long hair' presentation makes them distinctive, as you've noticed, in a gay bar/environment?
 
 
Ganesh
16:07 / 11.04.02
Okaaay, before I answer that fully, Plums, the entire basis upon which I rest my line of questioning is up there in the first post: basically, male Barbeloids who've identified themselves online or IRL as being at least bisexual-ish. I'm utterly prepared for the 'shock' of discovering this may not be a representative sample of Bisexual Men In General...
 
 
Ganesh
16:58 / 11.04.02
You're probably quite correct, though, in suggesting that what I've labelled 'bisexual-identifying' is probably more akin to 'bisexual's nearest the mark (if I have to state a preference) but hey, don't label me, maaan'. The other (equally flimsy) basis for my pseudo-hypothesis is my (limited) experience of fetish clubs which collectively advertise as neither straight nor gay but 'mixed' or even 'pansexual'. I'm thinking Torture Garden but also Submission, in Edinburgh.

The hair thing is tongue-in-cheek and quite possibly overstated but I stand by it as a general observation. In gay clubs, the general absence of long hair is striking (was this always the case? were archetypes more flexible pre-'80s? ZoCher?) as is (generally speaking) the widespread disregard - even, on occasion, distaste - for androgynous body types...
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
23:28 / 06.01.04
I resurrected this topic because I find myself thinking more and more about my (purported) bisexuality of late. Of course, as I've yet to engage in any behavior that can qualify me as such; I guess at the moment I can only be referred to as biamorous, so as always, grains of salt and all that. Sorry if this is a tired topic for some, but not for me.

Over the past year I have been exposed, from time to time, most recently within the past week, to an utterly beautiful creature, a friend of a friend, completely radiant in appearance and demeanor, and to whom I find myself very, very, very attracted. And yeah, it's a guy. This guy, however, is so wonderfully androgynous (and yeah, he did have the hair, though it's shorter now), so gentle and confident that any cockiness he ever displays is ridiculously ironic. I don't know that I've ever been quite so consciously and unabashedly crushing on a guy as I am with him.

And on New Years Eve, he kissed me. It was a friendly kiss, a surprise to be sure, and if memory serves I may have seen him kiss other mutual male friends who I know to be unflinchingly het. But it absolutely took my breath away, sent a bolt of electricity up my spine, and I hoped that just maybe it meant something else than, "Hi, good to see you, Happy New Years."

In college I did have the long hair (but, like, who didn't?), though it was an ex-girlfriend who prompted me to shave it off. I am, to most appearances, pretty het in my appearance; I'm sure "Queer Eye" would find just as much to be bitchy about in my lifestyle as anyone else. Despite a thin appearance I've got a gut I've got to work on, among other physical lapses, I've got fairly furry facial hair (to say nothing of that on the rest of me), and I've got a voice that's refined yet masculine (though, as an excellent mimic, either or both adjectives can change on a dime). While I don't consider myself unattractive, my features are those which I doubt would ever been mistaken for anything but male. Yes, I'm citing solely stereotypical characteristics or behavior, but that is in part what this discussion was about, yesno?

Yet. This is not how I see myself in my mind's eye. This persona I present to you all on here, while in many ways that of my own, is also of that someone else I'd like to be. And part of that vision is quite androgynous, or at least far more glam than I typically am. Despite my better, more intellectual nature, I do want to be desired on sight, much in the way that many attractive women know they are attractive and flaunt it for their own gain, and I do want that poise or mystique or glamour that a rare few, men or women, can pull off so well.

Vladimir J. Baptiste, Jr., is a phosphorescent seraphim, possessing filament hair, compact disc eyes, porcelain skin and bubble gum lips. His brow is uncreased by worry or doubt; the only wrinkles he might acquire are laugh lines. His clothes are a flatscreen television, cuffed and collared by Simon games, tailored to a lithe frame, yet he walks barefoot an inch above the ground, silent save for the distant sound of windchimes. He steals the children of the conservative right without saying a word; simply his existence is enough to tear open a picture window onto a far more immense and strange world than they've ever been allowed to see. When he does speak, it is on strawberry-scented winds, in ten voices at once, and never the same ten from moment to moment, yet always in exquisite harmony. His works enchant, bewitch, stimulate and evoke; in the face of them, some people laugh with joy, still others weep as they've never allowed themselves to. There's something more Warhol than Warhol about him, something more Dali than Dali, more Burroughs than Burroughs. He is distilled thought made flesh, the purity of which is that which inspired early Christians to simulated cannibalism. Oh, he'll be villified. They'll burn him in effigy, maybe they'll even burn him. But it won't matter, because he'll have grabbed the brass ring, and fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.

But you understand the basic semantical problem here, don't you? I refer to him in the third person. I know him to be me, but I don't yet know myself to be him. I've not yet stepped into that text up there yet. I look at myself in the mirror, and while this is not a bad self as far as selves go, it isn't who I know I'm supposed to be. I once wrote a flip line, describing my wardrobe at an event, wherein I said, "I'd fuck me, but I'm just freaky like that." There's also the problem of what you give up when you shed a skin; friends may go with it, and if the transformation was as physical as I'd have it be, viable employment might as well. (Then again, I seem to have stumbled into a job where half the male employees are gay, but I'm not terribly interested in any of them, and I'd like to not encourage the one I sense is interested in me. My point being that I don't think I'd be quite so immediately ostracized here as I might elsewhere, but then again, gay men are often threatened by avowedly bisexual men.) And I realize I am creating an ideal that I may not possibly be able to achieve, but what else are ideals for than proposed goals? What, have I seen Velvet Goldmine one too many times? Or maybe Interview With The Vampire? Does anyone have any thoughts?

Until potential translates into reality, I feel trapped as this little person with limited options and limited ways in which to say, come, I bring you love.

VJB2
 
 
gravitybitch
01:57 / 07.01.04
Thanks for dragging this one back up! It's interesting to see that the "bisexual stereotype" is to some degree alive and well in San Francisco... Most of the bisexual males I know tend cultivate long hair and a generally 'elfin' appearance. There are a few notable exceptions, though (my favorite leather-daddy being one!).

As far as my appearance... I wouldn't mind trading my "hourglass figure" in for something a little closer to an Art Deco nymph, but I'm not really complaining too much. Likewise, I wouldn't mind having "better" hair, but as has been observed earlier in this thread, a pixie cut has a certain appeal... and I'm not sure that I have a "type" when it comes to what sorts of women turn my head.
 
 
kid entropy
13:24 / 07.01.04
vlad,a very touching post.even thrilling.with me it went a bit different.although in my case i nearly became the androgynous boy,doomed with sensitivity,captivating others without noticing.at 13,glamorous lord of the flies leader,charming the girls and inspiring blind loyalty from seemingly smitten fellas.it reached critcal mass when the alpha male of the school and i fell out.you can't fight with passion,ideas or mystique that young.he beat me to a pulp and i was hounded like a dog.it was terrifying to see such devotion turn to gleeful,{if mild by worldly standards}torture.at 15 i returned in a band to a bigger audience and the momentum went crazy.long hair,rake thin,a gentle fire etc.again it collapsed,although i brought it down around me this time.frankly i was scared of a repeat of my last tumble,so i thought it'd be in my best interests to bow out.a long fallow period ensued,started drinking,tried to be gruff and manly.the more manly i got ,the more powerless i felt.quite a few years later i moved to another country.met a bisexual girl.not so much androgynous,but agressive sexually.she lusted after me with far more ferocity than i did her.it sparked something.i didn't admit it at the time ,but i was relearning that strange,feminine,in between,otherworldly quality.still stuborn from years of trying to be a man,it was an endless,if purifying ,conflict with her.a year long spell.i remained confused the entire year,but became a conduit for her idea of perfection.it resonated with my old self.weightloss,new coquettish mannerisms,extremely flamboyant dress.my best mate from the scottish highlands,a big lovable brute,proclaiming that he liked his girlfriend,but he loved me.to escape the vertigo i tried to shift into a dependent trophyboy for my girl.the pendulum had swung ,from the unconvincingly gruff cowboy of my drunk days,thru the peak of magical androgyny,to weak kneed ballerina.the spell was broken,she ditched me in spain,i ended up utterly done in.too long a story,too recent.another two year dip has followed.i've grown a beard although now it's blonde stubble.hair's getting long again.back in a city again.tried the stoic shite again,but now i'm back to shrooms and weed and they won't let me lie so obviously to myself anymore.i can feel my form changing again,towards the androgyny.i'm just going to let it,it's me.and i may not ever quite look the part again,too many ups and downs have marked my face with personality,the porcelain sheen is lost on a purely physical level,and i may be abit too battered to glide as effortlessly as i once did,but there's something more alive about all this.the effects are showing in a pleasing lowkey sort of way ,those around me are indeed curious.i've went on i know but it was just to say this,life will only allow one to embody that alchemical being for a season or two. it shouldn't be held onto so tight that you become a facade,nothing but the vision made flesh.just be that being,let him or it echo out towards others and they will see past the little belly and the facial scruff.maybe sometimes,late at night ,they'll find they'll need to blink,because something has overlapped,a trick of the light,and just for a second they glimpse the boy with the strawberry voice,the boy in bare feet.
 
 
salix lucida
18:33 / 07.01.04
3) Where do women (and I'm thinking of all you Barbe-slash writers) stand on this?

Ganesh, your description is exactly what I go for. Add some black clothes and "got picked on in high school" and that's it... and what I go for in women? change the identifying Bits around. same deal -- still with the willowy androgyny, not Butch Dyke androgyny. It's a stereotype for a reason. I identify as bisexual, but I wonder how much of that is that the "type" I like being one that occurs in both sexes and genders, and my not having issues one way or another, as opposed to I Like Girl-Girls and I Like Boy-Boys, etc. And I simulate that same androgyny in my look the best I can (I've overwhelmingly feminine features and Hips to boot). Some sort of reverse narcissism. I want to be what I like.

And as for the main question... well, most of the few guys of that look that I've known well have identified as bi. (A couple have given up on women since. One, in fact, cut his hair at that point, now that I think of it. What IS with that?) An annoying bit of it is what kid states: many who can pull off that stereotype and do rather become it, having little left of themselves when age takes it out of them. Some give up on it at that point. Some try to hold onto it and it gets rather scary. Others just still kinda look that way, but without the makeup, effort, or ego that comes with it in the goth scene. The last ones are my favourites, and I'm happy as a clam to be involved with one after the drahma I've put up with before.

So yeah, it's still alive in DC, in NY, even in little towns in Ontario where I've found myself clubspace and friends.

just rambling....
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:06 / 10.01.04
Moderator hat: the link above has nothing much to do with androgyny, and as such is not relevant to the discussion. I'm going to move to have it deleted, and if this is successful I suggest that, if it is important that we all share, it be shared in the Conversation, or possibly added to one of the threads on bisexuality, if that would be useful.

"Ponderous" is not quite what I would describe this thread as being. What it is getting at the moment is overly autobiographical and self-referential. The standard in the Head Shop is that if your life experience is relevant to the discussion, it's good to bring it in. As such, I was wondering if people would care to relate their life experiences to the thread, rather than the other way round.

An unseelie presence has raised the question of whether androgyny is a set of characteristics operating independently of gender (that is, androgynous men and androgynous women are both partaking of the same androgyny, without reference to whether they are women being more masculine or men being more feminine), or whether the drive to become less expressive of the features of one's own gender (or sex, which is a bit of a question in itself) simply ends up in about the same place of aesthetic reference. Another question growing out of this might be whether there is in fact an androgynous aesthetic that is sought out or created independently of the starting gender.

To take a but of a leap to one side, I am reminded of something the Dread Pirate Crunchy said about fetish pornography; that it is generally less important than mainstream pornogrpahy hat the models conform to a single standard of beauty, because what matters is what they are doing - that is, the locus is taken off the body as object in itself. To tie this in, is there a sense in whicjh androgyny can be an attractive feauture separate from gender, or even from the body, or is it tied up in presentation - is a short haircut essentially simply another way of presenting hair, and "androgynous" a desriptive adjective of the hair rather than a descriptive adjective of the person?
 
 
Perfect Tommy
06:02 / 13.01.04
(I can't think of any other way to put this, so I'm going to abuse scare quotes—the words therein do not necessarily accurately represent the views of the poster, Barbelith.com, or Perfect Tommy Unltd. Please don't hurt me.)

I have to wonder if men who are 'really' gay are attracted to masculinity, and men who identify bisexual are 'really' attracted to femininity but happen not to mind if there are penises present.

I take it back: please hurt me, I sound like an idiot. The women I've known who may not identify as bi, but would like to give it a whirl once or twice, are immediate counterexamples: they seem to be attracted to women who are typically girly.

I feel like I might have something that someone else could artfully present, but I'm spinning my wheels here...
 
 
Cat Chant
10:19 / 13.01.04
I have to wonder if men who are 'really' gay are attracted to masculinity, and men who identify bisexual are 'really' attracted to femininity but happen not to mind if there are penises present.

Certainly I think people can have erotic attachments to gender without insisting that 'gender' and 'sex' coincide - in Gender Trouble (oh, shush, you lot) Judith Butler talks about a lesbian friend of hers who went out with very masculine-presenting butch dykes (I think this was before 'boy-dyke' became an identifier, or at least a relatively well-known one) and in response to people saying "well, if you're attracted to masculinity, why don't you fancy men?" she would say "I like my boys to be girls"... Which could either be a way of saying she was attracted to genderplay in itself or specifically to masculinity in women.

I do think that 'masculinity' and 'femininity' play out differently on male and female bodies.

Oh - the other thing your post made me think of, Tom, was Judith Butler's criticism that bisexuality is usually conceptualized as "the coincidence of two heterosexual desires in a single psyche". So, you know, bisexuality is your feminine side desiring masculinity and your masculine side desiring femininity, which makes heterosexuality (as complementarity) even more central to the conceptualization of sex. So dissociating gender presentation from anatomy is certainly a step in the right direction, I should think...

Hmm. Okay, there's a reason I haven't posted to this thread before.
 
 
Ex
11:29 / 13.01.04
And moreover:
I have to wonder if men who are 'really' gay are attracted to masculinity, and men who identify bisexual are 'really' attracted to femininity but happen not to mind if there are penises present

Is it possibly that femininity is straight culture's default setting for sexual display, attractiveness and "gender". So bi men who spend most of their time in the straight community may be using a culturally mandated way of saying "Get a load of me! Phwoar!". I know a lot of straight males who are frustrated at not having a style of clothing, for example, that says "I'm trying to look sexy".
This may also be part of the idea of "exploring one's feminine side" - seeing as the feminine is supposed to contain stuff about being on display, sexual, open to advances.
Whereas gay male culture has found it necessary to eroticise masculinity, and develop a whole load of signifiers (muscles, haircuts, sexymanclothes) which straight culture doesn't feel the need for yet. (Not that gay culture doesn't eroticise femininity as well, and lots of other bits and bobs - the whole polarity debate of course leaves out stuff about age, for example). Bi blokes who have more contact with gay culture may find it more worth their while honing a set of masculine "I'm a fox" visual symbols.

(Then you also have the whole thing about using gendered appearance to appear "bi" in straight culture - maybe I can come back to that later.)

I'm not sure whether straight society should also develop a better vocabulary around what makes men sexy - obviously, an individually useful vocab for straight women, but also something that will be codified, marketted and enforced if there seems to be any money in it. And will then proceed to make men feel as bad as possible.

And on related matters:

bisexuality [seen as] is your feminine side desiring masculinity and your masculine side desiring femininity, which makes heterosexuality (as complementarity) even more central to the conceptualization of sex.

Yeah, the persistance of that definition sucks (although as an individual way of managing your desires and identity it is, of course, fine and groovy). I'm an example of bisexality working on reverse principles to that; I like both masculinity and femininity but appreciate them more on the "wrong" bodies (because: more often a thought-out act of self-expression; less scary associated bits; gender is more vivid when playing "against" the expected underlying sex). (No offense intended towards lovely manly men and femme ladies.)
But I seem to remember banging on about that on another thread, and I'm all hopped up on Genderqueer, so I'll stop.
 
 
macrophage
09:16 / 14.01.04
Well I'm bi and I must say that androgyny is quite attractive. We are all meat anyhow. Certain types of women I'm attracted to (usually tall and lanky with brown hair - a bit tomboyish??!!!) and then there's blokes that I find attractive, the long hair thing being funny. I had long hair when I was at school but I was into metal/rock - brung a foto from my dad's and my girlfriend is well into it! Genders a wierd one innit y'know duality - imagine if we were all born intersexual with both genitallias - I bet you the world would be a heck of a different place!!!!! That's why the archetype of the divine hermaphrodite is important to alot of us alchemically. Sexuality - lotta wierd divisions/steeotypes going on. My partner's bi as well, so we we are well on level about all that. People who like to give themselves strict boxes like straight or queer I have known, have claimed that bi isn't nothing but greedy but that's gross stereotyping innit. Sexual attraction is like electromagnetism - powerfull stuff!!!!
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
18:25 / 18.01.04
That's why the archetype of the divine hermaphrodite is important to alot of us alchemically.

Would anybody like to say something interesting about this? Macrophage, you are the logical choice, since you brought it up - how about filling us in on how you feel that the history of the divine hermaphrodite (Hermaphroditus?) informs the polarity or otherwise of gender presentation, and thus the attractiveness of androgyne presentation to different groups in the modern age?
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
01:21 / 20.01.04
Update to my earlier, on-topic comments:

Thursday night/Friday morning I found myself at a party being thrown by the aforementioned object of my attentions. I'd wanted to put on some makeup before attending in order to perhaps fit in or appear more pleasing to him, but the cheap compact I bought wouldn't open, so I made due with some concealer for a couple blemishes. Once again I observed him kiss on the lips definitely het mutual friends, though these were quick, friendly kisses. He and I began talking for a while, and he asked if I'd indulge him one of his fetishes, which apparently is to lick men's boots. Deciding that both to my own feelings and my image this would not be of direct effect, I agreed to allow him to. We adjourned to a bathroom ("Everyone will think we're doing blow," he said), where he went to town while I watched, taking in the surreality of it all. When he was done with both my boots, I said, "Now there's two things you can do for me: First, swish out your mouth!" He did so, and said, "And what's the other thing?" "Come here," I said.

And so I had my first truly passionate kiss with another man, albeit a highly androgynous, beautiful one.

So these issues are decreasingly abstract for me, and entering into the realm of the "real." I have no idea whether anything further will transpire between he and I; he's not contacted me since last Thursday, nor have I tried to contact him. I'm still as interested in females as I ever was, though there's something in the back of my head now that says that perhaps I needn't try to get into anything het in the near future. I am concerned that he may let this information slip to our mutual friends, though I am becoming less concerned about keeping this private should it reach a far more intimate level. I've even found myself more concerned about my present physical condition in regards to what he may think of it than I have for any of an assortment of female interests. What most surprises me is that the most unambiguous part of all this for me is that it felt quite natural, even when my mouth found some errant stubble.

Food for thought, at the very least. This has definitely ceased to be exclusively an intellectual exercise for me, as it really has been for almost ten years. More reports as events warrant.

VJB2
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:39 / 20.01.04
Mod hat: This journal style seems more Conversation than Head Shop, since it doens't really involve discussing issues, but rather uncritically relating personal experience. It strikes me that a lot more people read the Conversation, so a lot more people would be likely to contribute. Then we could start a thread in the Head Shop looking at the issues, excerpting some stuff here, and the two could run parallel...

Any thoughts?
 
 
XXII:X:II = XXX
22:23 / 20.01.04
Since it seems impossible to post things that are deemed ancillary to the topic as identified, despite the fact that the topic as identified had been abandoned before the aforementioned concerns moved me to resurrect it, or even that this represents a certain milestone for me directly relevant to my previously acceptable comments (which, I think, is the only thing that's genuinely annoyed me), let me respond to something unseelie had written:

I simulate that same androgyny in my look the best I can (I've overwhelmingly feminine features and Hips to boot). Some sort of reverse narcissism. I want to be what I like.

[This post, I should note, was not what I was referring to when I'd referred to the conversation as ponderous; I'd actually been speaking of my own post, but that's neither here nor there.]

You certainly have my envy and admiration, AUP, since, as I said, in appearance and mannerisms I would rarely be accused of being girly, though I think it'd be even rarer to accurately describe me as macho. If I can swing it I occasionally will opt for "refined yet hip," which private education allows me to simulate, though the former quality's association with a certain reprehensible class tends to fill me with venom. I wonder then how much else I'm simulating, or if there's even a distinction; as Frank Zappa sang, You are what you is. The great irony, I suppose, is that "refined yet hip" is the very essence of my Baptiste identity; he is my personal avenging archangel.

So yes, I recognize that there is a certain wish to slip into the skin of someone on the outside that epitomizes how you feel on the inside. And yes, this is blatantly narcissistic But isn't that one of the basic dynamics of the sexual act in the first place? You quite literally join with the object of your affections; in the end, it is unification with one's true self that allows one to touch the Godhead (no pun intended) and reach ultimate ecstasy (OK, maybe a little pun).

One of my more favorite erotic depictions, which I've found in more than one XXX comic and at least one "high art" graphic novel, is where someone actually gets to lay a duplicate of themself, or sometimes it's an animus (I'm thinking specifically here of "The Extended Dream of Mr. D" by Max). I suppose all recreational (read: not intended for reproduction) sex is masturbatory. In an ideal coupling (or tripling, or oh my) a feedback loop intensifies the experience for both involved, but still, that's personal pleasure gained through the appreciation of one's partner's(') enjoyment; you're not actually experiencing their pleasure, but you may as well be. In less healthy intimacy one or both are rushing to a finish line solely for their own benefit, and their partner's presence is almost incidental. Selfish as this perspective may seem, that's really all you can take ownership for.

So. I got to say what I wanted to say, and I got to say what I was expected to say. EEZ EVEREEBAHDEE HEPPEEE?

VJB2
 
 
Cat Chant
23:32 / 20.01.04
Since it seems impossible to post things that are deemed ancillary to the topic as identified, despite the fact that [...] this represents a certain milestone for me directly relevant to my previously acceptable comments (which, I think, is the only thing that's genuinely annoyed me)

Could you explain what's the "which" that genuinely annoyed you, VJB? (In a thread in the Policy, if you think it would be too threadrotty?)

I think the moderation problem here is similar to something I'm feeling in the 'avant fascism' thread. You seem to see an intuitive connection between your experiences and the abstract question about gender presentation and its connection to sexual attraction which kicked the thread off. I don't see that connection intuitively, and it would be helpful if you put in some more reading guidelines for other people on this thread: as it stands, it's a very lovely journal (as Haus says, I think with a much more generous intention than you give him credit for), but I'm left in the dark as to what you want to say about bisexuality and erotic attachment to particular gender styles.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:54 / 25.01.04
Having thought about it, my revised suggestion would probably be that another thread be started in the Conversation for people's tales of bisexual exploration (or bisexual attraction), for them's as were not all that interested in the discussion, which could then be drawn upon as a resource for the discussion here. For example, one might excerpt:

And so I had my first truly passionate kiss with another man, albeit a highly androgynous, beautiful one.

And ask what one can see in that about attitudes to sexuality. The key term for me would be "albeit". The idea seems to be that the fact that the fellow was highly androgynous (we can, I think, take "beautiful" as a feminising term here) made this more unlike actually kissing a man, from a signifying point of view. That is, that a woman who looks like Vita Sackville-West is actually quite close to a man who looks like Vita Sackville-West. If the epiphany was going the other way, the comparable phrase might have been "And so I kissed my first woman, albeit an androgynous, handsome one".

This seems to suggest that androgyny is being viewed as a semi-separate state of being perhaps halfway between manhood and womanhood (or masculinity and femininity), which can be accessed by either, and suggests that attraction to androgynous men (or women) can be seen as not quite the same as attraction to "manly" men or "womanly" women. Thus that attraction to androgynes is not actually the same as homosexual desire.

So, the sexual attraction felt by gay men towards men and the attraction felt by bisexual men, if we assume that this is how bisexual men work in general, are actually different things. Which might explain Ganesh's observation.

Alternatively, one might look at:

So yes, I recognize that there is a certain wish to slip into the skin of someone on the outside that epitomizes how you feel on the inside.

This is, of course, not narcissism, but rather a sort of hero worship, but it's a bit of a tail-biter also, so how does it help our understanding of how bisexual and gay male attraction to men works? Perhaps that different standards are being sought, but is the object of desire representing something that one desires as a complement to what is "on the inside", or something that represents what is "on the inside"? Quentin Crisp talks (in a manner certainly redolent of his time) about the attraction of the "real man" - the manly, male man that Ganesh sees as an attraction to gay men- as the quest for something one cannot truly have - a straight man who fancies men. Does the desire for androgynous men have at its heart something different - the desire for something that does not contrast with but represents the dimorphous feelings of the bisexual man? In which case, we come back to the question of how broad the gap is between the androgynous man and the androgynous woman is in this picture. Possibly the simple fact of same-gender attraction has its own "kick" - that is, in our current society, you cannot but feel different about getting cosy with somebody who identifies as same-gender, even if they are (to extend the idea) *physiologically* indistinguishable from an androgynous person who identifies as other-gender (I'm using "gender" here in the pronominal sense)...

Which maybe brings us back to Macrophage's archetype of the divine hermaphrodite. It is pretty rare for an androgyne actually to *be* hermaphroditic - that is, balanced perfectly between male and female. Even those who *are* are usually expected, encouraged and at times surgically motivated to behave as one or t'other - so can that *alchemical* balance actually occur in matters of attraction?
 
  
Add Your Reply